UCLA, Cisco and more join forces to replace TCP/IP
networkworld.com
UCLA, Cisco and more join forces to replace TCP/IP
1–10 of 86 posts
Re: UCLA, Cisco and more join forces to replace TCP/IP
#2Maybe it's just my nature to be guarded about grand visions, but does this idea really have a good chance of succeeding? Will it displace TCP/IP given the extent of IP deployment around the world?
No doubt there are people here who are network experts who can give a more learned review than I can after quickly reading the overview on the website.
I have a lot to learn about the subject...
Re: UCLA, Cisco and more join forces to replace TCP/IP
#3Maybe it's just my nature to be guarded about grand visions, but does this idea really have a good chance of succeeding? Will it displace TCP/IP given the extent of IP deployment around the world? No doubt there are people here who are network experts who can give a more learned review than I can after quickly reading the overview on the website. I have a lot to learn about the subject...
I am no network expert, but I guess their idea is to optimize the traffic in-between endpoints. The last segments (you ISP) would still be using TCP over IP.
Re: UCLA, Cisco and more join forces to replace TCP/IP
#4Maybe it's just my nature to be guarded about grand visions, but does this idea really have a good chance of succeeding? Will it displace TCP/IP given the extent of IP deployment around the world? No doubt there are people here who are network experts who can give a more learned review than I can after quickly reading the overview on the website. I have a lot to learn about the subject...
Though I'm hardly a networking expert I did some contract work implementing NDN simulations so I probably know a bit more about it than most people.
I'm highly skeptical that data entities provide a better (or even adequate) base abstraction for networking than network addresses associated with physical machines (ie. hosts, routers, etc.).
It seems to me that the problems NDN wants to solve, primarily content caching, would be better addressed at a higher abstraction level, as I think CDN's already do. This is my opinion, and I'm certainly open to being proved wrong by more qualified viewpoints.
As for the likelihood of NDN ever (a word I would almost never use, especially in regards to technology) replacing TCP/IP, it seems hard to believe given the extreme slowness with which IPv6, a comparatively minor change, is being adopted.
Re: UCLA, Cisco and more join forces to replace TCP/IP
#5I wonder if it's just my naiveté however it sounds like this is more likely to produce an X400 than an SMTP.
The vision seems pretty grand and all encompassing wholesale replacement of the entire networking stack, rather than small and easy to implement iterative approach. It seems that the biggest thing the TCP/IP folks got 'wrong' was the 32 bit address space, and even that small change is taking forever to be deployed.
Yes you could certainly improve TCP/IP but is it going to be 10X better?
Re: UCLA, Cisco and more join forces to replace TCP/IP
#6There's already IEEE_802.1aq which is optimizing routing and allowing multiple parallel routing paths. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.1aq
Lecture well worth of watching: Frank Fitzek, Aalborg University: Network Coding for Future Communication and Storage Systems https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaJYWrYKVRo
Re: UCLA, Cisco and more join forces to replace TCP/IP
#7I wonder if it's just my naiveté however it sounds like this is more likely to produce an X400 than an SMTP. The vision seems pretty grand and all encompassing wholesale replacement of the entire networking stack, rather than small and easy to implement iterative approach. It seems that the biggest thing the TCP/IP folks got 'wrong' was the 32 bit address space, and even that small change is taking forever to be depl…
Yes you could certainly improve TCP/IP but is it going to be 10X better?
Doubtful, and I think you'd really need to see that level of improvement to have any hope of replacing TCP/IP.
Re: UCLA, Cisco and more join forces to replace TCP/IP
#8I don't see how this would work at all, given that public key encryption wouldn't work at all with caching data?
Re: UCLA, Cisco and more join forces to replace TCP/IP
#9> more secure
If something is already secure, how can you make it moreso ?
What they mean is "less insecure".
Re: UCLA, Cisco and more join forces to replace TCP/IP
#10In NDN, all data is signed by data producers and verified by the consumers, and the data name provides essential context for security.
Centralizing the concept of security in the network's architecture will create an intractable problem. Certain parties will still want to impose their desire to be able to eavesdrop on the data. Therefore, there cannot be any real security in such centralized design for security.
The in tempore non suspecto in which it was still possible to roll out security jokes such as SSL, is over now. Nowadays, 95% of the world population (and their governments) will refuse to adopt any centralized security design, because they do not trust it.
In my impression, the project is dead on arrival.