Scott W Brim <sbrim(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> writes:
The metaphor I'm trying to use this week is that the IETF is
landscapers and we provide a fertile, beautiful area for people to go
wild and create excellent gardens.
Exactly. The beauty of TCP/IP (and indeed many protocols when done
well) is that they are generic enablers for additional higher-level
uses.
TCP/IP creates opportunity for innovation, and does so in a way that
is generally safe for the network.
In the case of BitTorrent, it runs on top of TCP. It is silly to
assume/expect all application protocols to be developed in the IETF.
It is true that BitTorrent (or more precisely its heavy use) creates
interesting dynamics that have implications for the net and maybe even
the IETF.
For example, BitTorrent creates an environment in which end users
start running "background" jobs that run for hours and suck up idle
background network capacity. I've heard ISPs use figures of 30% or
more of their capacity.... This is Just Fine at one level, but also
upsets some business models. Wouldn't it be nice if BitTorrent
traffic (at least in some cases) could be labeled as "background"
traffic so that ISPs had the ability to better prioritize or
figure out when it is critical to add more bandwidth vs. "just nice to
have"? Maybe more work here for diffserv?
Thomas
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf