What I find so frustrating about this paper is the fact it doesn’t engage with the long history of replacing TCP in the datacenter, the set of already-deployed solutions, and what we’ve learned from them. Part of that is that the solutions are mostly proprietary (but not secret, e.g. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9167399), but I can’t explain all of it.
Then it says things like:
Every aspect of TCP’s design is wrong: there is no part worth keeping.
Every aspect? Except the aspects of the design you’ve chosen to keep in your proposed solution?
I feel like if a student presented this at a conference it would get very poorly received, but this is getting a lot of airtime because a famous name is attached to it.
What I find so frustrating about this paper is the fact it doesn’t engage with the long history of replacing TCP in the datacenter, the set of already-deployed solutions, and what we’ve learned from them. Part of that is that the solutions are mostly proprietary (but not secret, e.g. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9167399), but I can’t explain all of it.
Then it says things like:
Every aspect? Except the aspects of the design you’ve chosen to keep in your proposed solution?
I feel like if a student presented this at a conference it would get very poorly received, but this is getting a lot of airtime because a famous name is attached to it.
Yeah, given that the paper is really about how to do RPCs as efficiently as possible, maybe another framing would have been better.