Re: Re- TCP broadcast storm

Bob Braden <braden@isi.edu> Thu, 11 November 1993 16:40 UTC

Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1993 08:33:22 -0800
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Bob Braden <braden@isi.edu>
Message-Id: <199311111633.AA14900@zephyr.isi.edu>
To: postel@isi.edu, karn@qualcomm.com
Subject: Re: Re- TCP broadcast storm
Cc: braden@isi.edu, ietf-hosts@isi.edu, TCP-Group@ucsd.edu, MGauthier@iit.nrc.ca

  *> From karn@qualcomm.com Wed Nov 10 21:17:57 1993
  *> Date: Wed, 10 Nov 93 21:17:02 -0800
  *> From: karn@qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
  *> To: postel@ISI.EDU
  *> Cc: braden@ISI.EDU, ietf-hosts@ISI.EDU, TCP-Group@ucsd.edu,
  *>         MGauthier@iit.nrc.ca
  *> In-Reply-To: Jon Postel's message of Mon, 8 Nov 1993 08:43:10 -0800 <199311081643.AA24710@zephyr.isi.edu>
  *> Subject: Re- TCP broadcast storm
  *> Content-Length: 553
  *> X-Lines: 11
  *> 
  *> This confusion between the Internet itself and the hosts attached to
  *> it continues. Last week, during the Houston IETF, the New York Times
  *> carried an article titled "Traffic Jams on the Information Highway"
  *> (or words to that effect, this is from memory). The article was
  *> clearly about the extreme loads that certain popular *server machines*
  *> on the net have been experiencing, but the title metaphor obviously
  *> gives the (mis)impression that the NSF backbone communication links are
  *> overloaded. As far as I have been able to observe, they are not.
  *> 
  *> Phil
  *> 
  *> 

Phil,

Yeah, that was noted by a number of people.  Dave Sincoskie (you know
him, I suspect!) twigged John Markoff personally about it, and John
said essentially that yes, he understood the distinction, but as a user
he did not care.  The main point of the article was the need to charge
for services, and I guess he thought the issue of host/net services
was secondary.

Bob