Transcript Why we don’t need ANTS…

Why we don’t need ANTS
(and active networks)…
Johnny Ngan
By employing ANTS…
• Increase overhead and latency
• Reduce at least 74% throughput
• Consume many more CPU cycles
Won’t use it anyway
Overview
• Why active network is a dumb idea
• Why ANTS sucks
Santa’s view
• If active network is so great, why not to
have the whole network stack written in
Java and running in user mode?
Security issues
• Running mobile code is dangerous
– Java: the way to go?
– New security attacks
• Timing issues (e.g. SSH vulnerability)
Won’t be useful
• Routers won’t be “active”
– Complicated, large overhead
• Only implemented by end systems
– And you used multicast as an example?
• Why not just use IP/UDP?
Overview
• Why active network is a dumb idea
• Why ANTS sucks
Poor choices of language
• Java is slow
• Reduce at least 76% throughput
– “the system is usable for experimenting with
distributed application”
• CPU overhead not discussed
Freedom:
Always the more the better?
• Encourage nonstandard protocol
– Emerging of TCP-unfriendly protocols
– More congestion problems
• DDoS is easier than ever!
• Also easy to steal CPU cycles…
Resource limiting is nontrivial
• Adds to overhead
• Can be done but hard to avoid overuse