On 09-Sep-19 12:15, Joe Touch wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 8, 2019, at 1:26 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com
>> <mailto:brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't that require the middle box to become an architectural element?
>>>
>>> Yes, but not just “an” (one):
>>>
>>> Touch, J: Middlebox Models Compatible with the Internet. USC/ISI
>>> (ISI-TR-711), 2016. (Type: Technical Report | Links | BibTeX)
>>>
>>> * https://www.strayalpha.com/pubs/isi-tr-711.pdf
>>
>> I'll take the liberty of pointing out that we've known for many years that
>> there are multiple types of middleboxes and they have multiple facets:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3234
>
> Facets are just properties. That doc makes no attempt to describe them as
> architectural roles.
Agreed. My point is that the issue has been lying on the IETF table for many
years, and we've collectively chosen to ignore it.
>>
>> So far, we haven't added them to any formal architectural description of
>> the Internet, probably because we don't have one.
>
> RFC1122, RFC1123, RFC1812 as standards.
>
> I (and IMO those RFCs) disagree with the position you took in RFC1958, FWIW.
"you" = the IAB in 1996; I was only the document editor. But IMHO those RFCs
are not architectural as such. They describe functions of nodes, not how the
nodes work together as a system.
Brian
>
> Joe
>
>
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
Int-area@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
