Subject: RE: [Tsvwg] redundant data

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 15:28:08 -0600

> I don't think he just hurts himself.  Say the app runs at some rate
> X bps.  But, for the sake of redundancy the sender runs at 2X bps
> and sends all the data twice, which may be fine according to the CC
> rate limit.  And, we might even call that "fair" because everyone is
> getting a rate of 2X bps.  But, if this connection didn't send all
> this needless junk into the network (i.e., only sent at rate X bps)
> then there would be X bps of new capacity for others to use to
> transmit useful data and get actual work done.  If enough people
> send enough redundant data into the network then everyone suffers
> because they could all utilize more bandwidth if all the needless
> junk was not floating around.

A quick question. How is redundancy defined? Is a text (ascii for example) stream redundant--to me it is, since I can always compress it and reduce the network traffic. So should the transport protocol now go about compressing data ... Why do we need application  layer protocols then. 

--yogesh 
_______________________________________________
tsvwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg