Comments for Mosharaf Kabir Chowdhury http://www.mosharaf.com To V or not to V that is the question Thu, 05 Nov 2009 10:13:57 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 Comment on Development of the Domain Name System by Priyanka Reddy http://www.mosharaf.com/blog/2009/11/04/development-of-the-domain-name-system/comment-page-1/#comment-394 Priyanka Reddy Thu, 05 Nov 2009 10:13:57 +0000 http://www.mosharaf.com/?p=1183#comment-394 It is interesting that most designs of that era don't consider security as a high priority. Many of the security concerns of DNS are due to lack of authenticity and integrity checking of the data, something that is getting to be a pattern in many of the protocols we've looked at. It is interesting that most designs of that era don’t consider security as a high priority. Many of the security concerns of DNS are due to lack of authenticity and integrity checking of the data, something that is getting to be a pattern in many of the protocols we’ve looked at.

]]> Comment on Looking Up Data in P2P Systems by Mosharaf http://www.mosharaf.com/blog/2009/11/01/looking-up-data-in-p2p-systems/comment-page-1/#comment-385 Mosharaf Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:37:24 +0000 http://www.mosharaf.com/?p=1161#comment-385 There are literally thousands of papers on p2p without much mainstream success, except for BT. And BT itself does not use well known research works like Chord or CAN or Pastry or Tapestry (I think it uses or at least used to use some moderately large variation of Kademlia). So my view is either p2p research is all done or it arrived before its time and will flourish if some other factors (no idea about what they might be) come into play. Overall, its just going no where with hundreds of papers every year. There are literally thousands of papers on p2p without much mainstream success, except for BT. And BT itself does not use well known research works like Chord or CAN or Pastry or Tapestry (I think it uses or at least used to use some moderately large variation of Kademlia). So my view is either p2p research is all done or it arrived before its time and will flourish if some other factors (no idea about what they might be) come into play. Overall, its just going no where with hundreds of papers every year.

]]> Comment on Looking Up Data in P2P Systems by Randy Katz http://www.mosharaf.com/blog/2009/11/01/looking-up-data-in-p2p-systems/comment-page-1/#comment-384 Randy Katz Mon, 02 Nov 2009 23:01:28 +0000 http://www.mosharaf.com/?p=1161#comment-384 So the real question is whether p2p systems is old hat or still worthy of study? File sharing systems are pretty well developed at this stage, with Bittorrent as one of the most successful, and as I far as I know, it does not really use anything like Chord for its operation. Have these ideas really impacted systems, in the final assessment? So the real question is whether p2p systems is old hat or still worthy of study? File sharing systems are pretty well developed at this stage, with Bittorrent as one of the most successful, and as I far as I know, it does not really use anything like Chord for its operation. Have these ideas really impacted systems, in the final assessment?

]]> Comment on ExOR: Opportunistic Multi-Hop Routing for Wireless Networks by Priyanka Reddy http://www.mosharaf.com/blog/2009/10/14/exor-opportunistic-multi-hop-routing-for-wireless-networks/comment-page-1/#comment-362 Priyanka Reddy Fri, 16 Oct 2009 04:10:52 +0000 http://www.mosharaf.com/?p=1065#comment-362 It was unfortunate that ExOR interacts so badly with TCP. I would have liked them to make that point more clear upfront as a severe limitation of its practicality. I wonder if any work has been done to mitigate the negative effects of ExOR combined with TCP. It was unfortunate that ExOR interacts so badly with TCP. I would have liked them to make that point more clear upfront as a severe limitation of its practicality.

I wonder if any work has been done to mitigate the negative effects of ExOR combined with TCP.

]]> Comment on XORs in the Air: Practical Wireless Network Coding by Mosharaf http://www.mosharaf.com/blog/2009/10/15/xors-in-the-air-practical-wireless-network-coding/comment-page-1/#comment-361 Mosharaf Fri, 16 Oct 2009 02:55:57 +0000 http://www.mosharaf.com/?p=1072#comment-361 And I was wondering why you were so surprised to know that I could recognize that pic to be Jon ;) And I was wondering why you were so surprised to know that I could recognize that pic to be Jon ;)

]]> Comment on XORs in the Air: Practical Wireless Network Coding by Randy Katz http://www.mosharaf.com/blog/2009/10/15/xors-in-the-air-practical-wireless-network-coding/comment-page-1/#comment-359 Randy Katz Fri, 16 Oct 2009 02:45:32 +0000 http://www.mosharaf.com/?p=1072#comment-359 Oh wow, I just realized that I forgot that Jon Crowcoft was a co-author on this paper. Very good summary, and I am in agreement on your gotchas. Nevertheless, a clever idea worthy of exploration. One is left wondering whether there other kinds of reliable transport that might work better than TCP in this environment. Perhaps a future 268 project? Oh wow, I just realized that I forgot that Jon Crowcoft was a co-author on this paper. Very good summary, and I am in agreement on your gotchas. Nevertheless, a clever idea worthy of exploration. One is left wondering whether there other kinds of reliable transport that might work better than TCP in this environment. Perhaps a future 268 project?

]]> Comment on Architecture and Evaluation of an Unplanned 802.11b Mesh Network by Priyanka Reddy http://www.mosharaf.com/blog/2009/10/06/architecture-and-evaluation-of-an-unplanned-802-11b-mesh-network/comment-page-1/#comment-353 Priyanka Reddy Wed, 07 Oct 2009 00:40:39 +0000 http://www.mosharaf.com/?p=1008#comment-353 I agree with you about their explanation of the Roofnet 'layer' and addressing scheme - it certainly seemed to be lacking a thorough explanation of their design choices behind the addressing scheme. I agree with you about their explanation of the Roofnet ‘layer’ and addressing scheme – it certainly seemed to be lacking a thorough explanation of their design choices behind the addressing scheme.

]]> Comment on PortLand: A Scalable Fault-Tolerant Layer 2 Data Center Network Fabric by Sameer Agarwal http://www.mosharaf.com/blog/2009/09/22/portland-a-scalable-fault-tolerant-layer-2-data-center-network-fabric/comment-page-1/#comment-334 Sameer Agarwal Wed, 23 Sep 2009 03:49:11 +0000 http://www.mosharaf.com/?p=899#comment-334 I agree, but perhaps they didn't really have any network topology based systems to compare with. A comparison with SEATTLE on a fat-tree based network topology would have been good, but obviously it would be biased towards PortLand. It would have been really great if PortLand and VL2 were accepted in different conferences so that one would have compared it with the other :-) I agree, but perhaps they didn’t really have any network topology based systems to compare with. A comparison with SEATTLE on a fat-tree based network topology would have been good, but obviously it would be biased towards PortLand. It would have been really great if PortLand and VL2 were accepted in different conferences so that one would have compared it with the other :-)

]]> Comment on PortLand: A Scalable Fault-Tolerant Layer 2 Data Center Network Fabric by Priyanka Reddy http://www.mosharaf.com/blog/2009/09/22/portland-a-scalable-fault-tolerant-layer-2-data-center-network-fabric/comment-page-1/#comment-333 Priyanka Reddy Wed, 23 Sep 2009 00:48:31 +0000 http://www.mosharaf.com/?p=899#comment-333 I also thought it was odd that they didn't do a quantitative comparison against any other architectures. They state the numbers they got when testing the various criteria (eg. convergence time starts at 65ms for single failure, it takes 110ms to restore connectivity to a receiver, etc), but without any type of baseline to compare against, it's hard to say how good PortLand performs. I also thought it was odd that they didn’t do a quantitative comparison against any other architectures. They state the numbers they got when testing the various criteria (eg. convergence time starts at 65ms for single failure, it takes 110ms to restore connectivity to a receiver, etc), but without any type of baseline to compare against, it’s hard to say how good PortLand performs.

]]> Comment on Floodless in SEATTLE: A Scalable Ethernet Architecture for Large Enterprises by Mosharaf http://www.mosharaf.com/blog/2009/09/17/floodless-in-seattle-a-scalable-ethernet-architecture-for-large-enterprises/comment-page-1/#comment-309 Mosharaf Fri, 18 Sep 2009 23:50:18 +0000 http://www.mosharaf.com/?p=876#comment-309 I think its because of the shared hosting thing. I am still with a contract with Netfirms and cannot get out until is done :( I think its because of the shared hosting thing. I am still with a contract with Netfirms and cannot get out until is done :(

]]>