And what would we say of architects who continued to build to their original plan after the bombs had been flying for twenty years and showed no sign of stopping?
I would prefer the architects with the plans for a bomb shelter. On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Keith Moore <[email protected]>wrote: > > On Oct 6, 2010, at 1:45 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Keith Moore > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> The central problem with the Internet seems to be that nearly everybody >> who routes traffic thinks it's okay to violate the architecture and alter >> the traffic to optimize for his/her specific circumstances - and the end >> users and their wide variety of applications just have to cope with the >> resulting brain damage. > > > Objective observation suggests that the Internet architecture *is* that > anyone who wants to can molest traffic in any way they feel fit. > > > If a bomb hits a famous building, we don't generally call the resulting > rubble part of the building's architecture. > > (unless, maybe, it's the Hiroshima Peace Dome, which was repurposed to > commemorate perhaps the worst man-made disaster in history.) > > But really, I do not understand why people have to fetishize the constancy > of IP addresses end to end. IP addresses are not particularly interesting to > look at. > > > It's one of the two fundamental principles on which the Internet is based. > Universal packet format, universal address space. That's IP in a nutshell. > > > Keith > > > > -- Website: http://hallambaker.com/
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
