Re: deprecating Postel's principle - considered harmful
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: "architecture-discuss@xxxxxxxx" <architecture-discuss@xxxxxxxx>, ietf@xxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: deprecating Postel's principle - considered harmful
- From: Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 21:59:38 -0400
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
I'm another person who really doesn't want to see an RFC of the form
"Jon Postel was wrong". Part of the problem is that he was right in so
many ways, that to single out in a particular way that he was "wrong"
[*], conveys entirely the wrong impression. Even if he was "wrong" [*]
about the sentence most often attributed to him today.
[*] or lacking perfect foresight, or is being misunderstood, or taken
out of context, or ...
Depending on where you mark the start of the Internet, it and the first
protocols have existed for around forty years. It's been around for so
long, longer than most of its users have been alive, that it's easy to
take for granted the accumulated wisdom that went into producing it -
both Jon's contributions and others'. That's not to say that they got
everything right, and today we're painfully aware of some of the
shortcomings. But that they got it working well enough to endure for
40 years and counting, and to be able to evolve (to some extent) to
continue to serve the whole world today, was a tremendous
accomplishment. Of course, different bits of wisdom become more (or
less) applicable (or need to be interpreted in different contexts) at
different points of evolution and scale.
I seriously doubt that Jon would have wanted us to be stuck in the past
and stop learning. But neither should we discard hard-won lessons of
the past.
A lot of additional hard-won wisdom has been cited in this thread, and I
think it could do a service to try to capture it and place it in the
context of the earlier accumulated wisdom.
Keith
p.s. I've often said that "the web" was optimized for deployability.
Lots of "the web" was poorly designed, IMO, but enough of it was
designed just well enough to make it attractive to users, and that very
attractiveness is what has fueled the effort required to improve it. A
similar statement could be made of the Internet itself. As an engineer,
this bugs me a bit, but I think it's reality. It's often said that the
perfect is the enemy of the good, but maybe sometimes, the good is the
enemy of the deployable. Being liberal in what you accept is similar,
in a sense, to optimizing for deployability.
[Index of Archives]
[IETF Annoucements]
[IETF]
[IP Storage]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCTP]
[Linux Newbies]
[Mhonarc]
[Fedora Users]