# Approximate Networking for Universal Internet Access
## 3 Context-Appropriate Approximate Networking Trade-Offs  
### Trade-Offs in Networking  
In a complex system such as the Internet and the networking TCP/IP ecosystem, in which multiple subsystems work in silos isolated from each other, there is a danger that improvement/simplification of one subsystem may increase the complexity of some of the other subsystems and deteriorate their performance. We propose that approximate networking ecosystem as a holistic systems-oriented framework that can offer context-appropriate management of the various trade-offs involved in networking in terms of performance, cost, and complexity. Some of these trade-offs are discussed below:  
* _Fidelity versus affordability/convenience:_ a lot of research has shown that customers are willing to sacrifice considerable fidelity for a more convenient and accessible service [48]. The notion of fidelity matches with the QoS/ Quality of Experience (QoE) concept. Convenience subsumes concepts such as the cost, accessibility/availability, and simplicity of the service. The fact that users are willing to tradeoff fidelity for convenience and affordability is an extremely important insight for our topic.
* _Latency versus throughput:_ it is well known in literature that throughput-optimal solutions can compromise performance in terms of delay [49]. The _Sneakernet_ concept, long known in networking folklore (_\"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway.\"_--[PERSON], 1981) is the embodiment of the latency-throughput trade-off. In a similar vein, DTN routing protocols also tradeoff latency for throughput and connectivity (i.e., DTN Bundles can achieve the same throughput as IP protocols but with longer latency).
* _Throughput versus coverage/reliability:_ in wireless networks, there is a tradeoff between the throughput and the coverage (and the reliability) of a transmission, i.e., for higher-rate transmissions, the coverage area is typically smaller and the bit error rate higher. The idea of approximate networking can be used to provide context-appropriate QoS to 5G users [3], by provisioning higher rates to users and applications where feasible and desired, while still allowing everyone access to basic connectivity (allowing users who are currently offline to come online).
* _Coverage versus consumed power:_ in wireless networks, the coverage of a transmission is directly proportional to the transmission power. Since nodes do not need to communicate at all times, researchers have proposed putting to sleep parts of the infrastructure, such as the base transceiver station (BTS) of cellular systems, to save on energy costs.
* _Other trade-offs:_ many innovative solutions are able to improve performance by inventing a new tradeoff. For example, [PERSON] et al. discovered that an interesting way to reduce latency is to tradeoff some additional capacity or redundancy (i.e., the authors showed that latency can be reduced by by initiating redundant operations across diverse resources and using the first complete response) [50]. Future approximate networking solutions can derive much utility by focusing on discovering new ways of developing context-appropriate new trade-offs.