[IP] more on Caltech (Steven Low) FAST TCP work

[Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: "David P. Reed" <dpreed@reed.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 11:49:26 -0400
To: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>
Subject: Re: comments

I have no exciting technical view on this.  The actual 'packet tracking'
innovation (which gets 3x gain in utility only when others are not sharing
the line) is not very deep, but not worthless either.   All of the 6000x
comparison with cable modems seems to come from using fiber, which
Caltech's innovation is not responsible for.

The real problem is the writer's breathless overhyping, creating confusion
in the readers mind in a big way.   This is not relevant to getting faster
last mile connectivity at all.   Yet the comparison with cable modems and
the title of the article imply that.   If the Caltech researchers and
Caltech PR folks are responsible for this overhyping, shame on them.


------ Forwarded Message
From: "David P. Reed" <dpreed@reed.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 12:05:07 -0400
To: dave Farber <dave@farber.net>
Subject: more on Caltech (Steven Low) FAST TCP work

Some on the e2e discussion list are complaining to Steven Low of CALTECH
that he violated standard research practice by publicity before peer review.

In general, this seems like a valid concern to me, but it's hard to get
wound up about it, especially these days when research support in the
traditional model is declining.   You almost have to keep up publicity in
order to be taken seriously by funders.

My own gripe is more about overreaching in claims, rather than being
out-of-order.   Claiming more than you can defend creates a world in which
science fiction writers' imaginations win grants, while scientists who
follow the scientific method lose out.


------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/