> From: t.p. <daedulus(_at_)btconnect(_dot_)com>
> is this something that the IETF should be involved with or is it better
> handled by those who are developping LTE etc?
I would _like_ to think it's better done by the IETF, since congestion
control/response more or less has to be done on an end-end basis, so trying
to do it in any particular link technology is not necessarily useful (unless
the entire connection path is across that technology). But...
> From: Cameron Byrne <cb(_dot_)list6(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
> There is a huge cross layer optimization issue between 3gpp and the
> ietf. It is worse than you can imagine, highly akin to how the industry
> moved passed the ietf with Nat.
Well, I sort of see the analogy with NAT. But rather than rathole on a
non-productive discussion of similarities and causes, I think it's more
useful/fruitful to examine your point that people are doing all sorts of
localized hacks in an attempt to gain competitive advantage.
Sometimes this is not a problem, and they are (rightly) responding to places
where the IETF isn't meeting needs (one good example is traffic directors in
front of large multi-machine web servers).
But how much good going it alone will do in this particular case (since
congestion control is necessarily end-end) is unclear, although I guess the
'terminate (effectively) the end-end connection near the border of the
provider's system, and do a new one to the terminal at the user's device'
model works. But there definitely is a risk of layers clashing, both trying to
do one thing...
Noel