On Oct 6, 2010, at 1:45 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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
|
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf