Re: [tsvwg] [mpls] OT (was Re: draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp was RE: gre-in-udp draft (was: RE: Milestones changed for tsvwg WG))

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

 



On 1/14/2014 4:57 PM, l.wood@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> I don't think sayng 'oh, that error source is no longer a problem' disproves
> Stone's overall point about undetected errors, though the
> examples he uses from the technology of the day are necessarily
> dated. Dismissing the overall  point because the examples use obsolete
> technology is throwing the baby out with the bathwater; a host-to-host
> error check catches things that intermediate checks cannot.
> 
> Measuring error rates across end-to-end  Internet traffic is something that has
> not received much attention , as error detection is not
> instrumented well - hence citing Stone's published work,  in the absence
> of awareness of anything newer (and as high profile/immediately recognisable
> as sigcomm) in the area.
> 


+1 ... the message in the paper is applicable to layered systems
and internetworks in general.  Changes in the link technology
since then don't invalidate it, especially since we know that
the technology not only changes rapidly, but also is always
growing in diverse directions, such that there things almost
universally true today may be turned on their heads tomorrow.

Designs for stacking layers need to follow solid general
principles in order to be robust to changes (above and below).

-- 
Wes Eddy
MTI Systems




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