Re: [arch-d] ETSI launches new group on Non-IP Networking addressing 5G new services

[Bob Hinden <[e-mail]>]

I wonder if this desire for new non-ip networking architectures, is really a replay of the what I call the packet switching vs. circuit switching debate.   Somewhat more recently Ethernet vs. Token ring.  Basically, can networking architectures provide deterministic service (like circuit switching), or is the Internet best effort OK.

It was very common to hear that voice or video couldn’t possibly work over an Internet style packet switching network.   I haven’t heard that in a while, or at least until recently after the 5G hype started gearing up.

I attended the lunch speaker session on 5G at the Singapore IETF, slides can be found:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/106/materials/slides-106-edu-sessa-5g-impact-on-networks-edge-cloud-and-slicing-00

Seemed to me it was proposing (see slide 13) an end to end 5G network/service.  Lots of words like "Guarantee transport SLAs for each service”, “Optimize network resources as load conditions change”, etc.   I think arguments proposing a new non-ip networking architecture is back to wanting a more deterministic networking (aka circuit switching).   I suppose it also has something to do with wanting to sell services to very large numbers of devices (vs. the current Internet model a subscription per enterprise or home user).

I didn’t understand why all of this couldn’t be built today with the current set of IP wireless and wired technologies.   I was thinking of coming to the mic and ask the speaker if he had heard about the Internet, but decided it wouldn’t be constructive :-)

Bob