North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Selfish routing
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 07:53:19PM -0700, Mike Lloyd wrote: > > >Selfish routing is the simplest and cheapest to implement, which are large > >factors in evaluating the "best" dumb network. > > Simpler than a God of TE in the middle of the network, but not simplest. > What we have today is about the simplest, and it's not what > Roughgarden means by "selfish" routing. He assumes routing which > promptly responds to congestion-induced latency, and that is not > automated in much of the Internet today. It's also not simple to > implement correctly. > > The technology is available, and a perennial question (which Sean > Donelan referred to at least obliquely at the start of this thread) is > whether it's better to use smarter routing decisions, to add more > bandwidth, or to just leave things as they are. Since we're awash in > bandwidth we can't find enough uses for, and some users remain > dissatisfied, it's nice to see academic results that suggest option one > is (theoretically) effective. Er, nothing in the paper said anything at all about the performance of latency-influenced routing vs other, presumably dumber, schemes. Other papers, maybe? References? -- Barney Wolff http://www.databus.com/bwresume.pdf I'm available by contract or FT, in the NYC metro area or via the 'Net.
|