Re: ITC copped out on UTC again

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Feb 7, 2012, at 2:12 59PM, John C Klensin wrote:

> 
> 
> --On Tuesday, February 07, 2012 10:45 -0800 james woodyatt
> <jhw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> ...
>> TAI has a fairly stable foundation in non-relativistic
>> physics, which experience has shown to be somewhat resistant
>> to the power of political bodies to modify at will, so it
>> should be good enough for most running code on the Internet.
> 
> You obviously have not been in enough meetings in which
> proposals were put forth, by political types with the best of
> intentions, for regulations to improve the Internet...
> regulations that would work really well if the speed of light
> were adjusted upward by 10% or so and/or could be dialed up and
> back by a bit to match regulatory convenience. :-(
> 
> What was that about a free lunch?


Yes.  A line I heard recently (from someone else whom I think is
on this list) is that when you tell a politician that something
violates the laws of physics, that statement is taken as a negotiating
position.

		--Steve Bellovin, https://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb





_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]