On Sun, Sep 05, 2010 at 11:35:05PM +0530, Mohit Singh wrote:
> > This happens with proprietary vendors, badly written code, not worth making
> > public, worst with interoperability.
>
> No ISP is running 100% FOSS. Its practically impossible. n Vendors
> with m devices is a truth of the trade. None can escape that.
>
> The only way out is - vendors take over ISP and use their pure 'end to
> end' solutions :) this they'll never do. They are clever enough to put
> ball in the competition's court.
>
> Customers on residential DSLs don't get any SLA
> > guarantee but that doesn't mean they don't deserve quality.
>
> Take a VPLS circuit with platinum labeled DSCP. They'll run over
> anything to give you quality.
>
> Oh, and running
> > things in lab is different from running it in production.
>
> I talk of production only. You know this.
>
> I never heard of
> > Mohan Tambe. And I hope you can see the progress with IPv6 which is probably
> > running in (test?)-beds of Indian ISPs since years, but yet to see a
> > successful deployment.
>
> NAT and MPLS almost eliminated need of IPv6. Then need of IPv6 had the
> rebirth. I have seen the TRAI move to make IPv6 happen fast.
>
> Madam Radia Perlman once told me - "Ipv6 will never replace IPv4.
> There will be islands of IPv6 connected by IPv4". Lets see where
> things converge.
>
That is because there are lot of ipv4 hardwares but ipv4 will
eventually fade out. This is applicable to all the technologies.
When new things come up old techs don't just vanish, they need
time to fade out.
>
> > This is completely FUD. I hope you know that TCP/IP was born in BSD because
> > it
> > existed during that time, source were freely available. There are RFCs,
> > working groups, and things which don't get standardized, were written to be
> > compatible with an already existing implementation. And it's purely
> > implementor's choice. {S,}he might have some technical reasons to go for one
> > and not other but not always.
> >
>
> we all know about the serious implementor's choice. Ibrahim Haddad
> confessed on the CGL vision himself :)
>
> > And why is documentation going to contain the archives of discussion, that
> > doesn't make any sense.
>
> You took 'discussion' wrongly.
>
> FYI Internet had first congestion collapse on 25-10-1986. Van Jacobson
> and Mike Carels immediately started working on it. The output was
> summarized in the seminal paper 'Congestion Avoidance and Control'.
> They even went ahead on gateway side of that. Madam Sally wrote RED
> paper with Van Jacobson and everything was implemented nicely.
>
> Improvements are still going on. Even in Linux based systems. Do we
> get even a single 'practical' Internetworking paper on Linux? Its not
> because they dont care discussing and putting it like that, but also
> that nobody cares for them doing Internetworking. State of EPFL
> efforts,state of Alexey and Confessions of Haddad make strong
> conclusion against Linux based Internetworking. I still dont blow
> that. Let it be.
>
Do you think guys at google, facebook etc. are idiots to use linux on
their servers?
Infact Marshall Kirk Mckusick has written in his book that linux has
helped FreeBSD a lot by supplying a lot of developers and taking the
open source movement to the next level. Get a copy of Design and
Implementation of FreeBSD. Let's be pragmatic.
> > It'll soon have something.
>
> looking forward to it. :)
>
> where do you work?india?
>
>
> Mohit Singh
> ------------------
>
> Today's Imagination is Tomorrow's Innovation
> Today's Innovation is Tomorrow's Common Sense
> Today's Common Sense is Tomorrow's Nonsense
> _______________________________________________
> bsd-india mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.bsd-india.org/mailman/listinfo/bsd-india
_______________________________________________
bsd-india mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.bsd-india.org/mailman/listinfo/bsd-india
