On Oct 6, 2010, at 1:45 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Keith Moore <mo...@network-heretics.com> > 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@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
