| |||||||||||||
SCTP is the heir apparentSCTP is the heir apparentPosted Nov 22, 2009 0:56 UTC (Sun) by khim (subscriber, #9252)In reply to: SCTP is the heir apparent by perennialmind Parent article: Reducing HTTP latency with SPDY
Even if it does take ten years, twenty years, won't you want to be able to drop the inefficient backwards compatibility at some point? Is it really so inefficient? Is it really impossible to make things more efficient while retaining compatibility? Witness fate of Algol which decided to "drop inefficient backwards compatibility at some point" and compare it with Fortran which kept it around for decades. And the same story is with RISC and x86. And other countless examples. Compatibility is very important: it can only be dropped if there are no compatible way forward. Comcast is upgrading their gear to IPv6 because /they/ need it. Wrong emphasis. /They/ is irrelevant. /Need/ is imperative word. With the multi-homing support in SCTP, you should be able to sell it to Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, etc as being genuinely useful to /them/. You can try do this, but it's almost too late. They are losing their network and are becoming just "another ISP" (albeit big one). AOL already went this way, Verizon, AT&T, Sprint will follow. Sure, they'll try to delay it as much as possible, and may be even survive long enough for SCPT to become the whole article in history books, not just a footnote, but ultimately it's not a big difference.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||||