The design philosophy of the DARPA internet protocols
SIGCOMM '88 Symposium proceedings on Communications architectures and protocols
End-to-end arguments in system design
ACM Transactions on Computer Systems (TOCS)
Proceedings of the thirteenth annual ACM symposium on Parallel algorithms and architectures
Addressing reality: an architectural response to real-world demands on the evolving Internet
FDNA '03 Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Future directions in network architecture
End-to-end congestion control schemes: utility functions, random losses and ECN marks
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON)
Tussle in cyberspace: defining tomorrow's internet
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON)
Policing congestion response in an internetwork using re-feedback
Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications
Why the Internet only just works
BT Technology Journal
Flow rate fairness: dismantling a religion
ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
The resource pooling principle
ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
Investigating the deployment and adoption of re-ECN
Proceedings of the Re-Architecting the Internet Workshop
A tussle analysis for information-centric networking architectures
The Future Internet
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Over the past decades, the fundamental principles of the Internet architecture have not significantly changed. However, Internet evolution and its effects on participants' interests have triggered the need for re-defining these design principles. "Design for Tussle" is an aspiration for future network designs, which enables the involved stakeholders to express their possibly conflicting socio-economic preferences on service instances. We performed a series of case studies examining whether established technologies are compatible with this new approach. Using the knowledge gained, we provide canonical examples and help protocol and network designers better to consider how to come up to the problem of "designing for tussle" in order to realize a flexible architecture. Finally, we associate protocol success to adoption and show, using empirical evidences, that carefully embracing the "Design for Tussle" paradigm can outweigh the higher complexity in protocol design.