[e2e] a means to an end
David P. Reed
dpreed at reed.com
Thu Nov 6 13:20:42 PST 2008
Our dear friend, Van Jacobsen, has decided that layering "where" under
"what" with regard to data is neither necessary, nor a good idea.
I agree: confusing the container with the information it happens to hold
is a layer violation. Information is not bound to place, nor is there a
primary instance. Information is place-free, and perhaps the idea that
there must be a "place" where it "is" is an idea whose time should pass,
and the purveyors of that idea as a holy writ (the OSI layering) retired
to play golf.
Craig Partridge wrote:
> In message <49134E2F.8010704 at reed.com>, "David P. Reed" writes:
>> Why should "location" be relevant to networking? Must all wires be
>> buried permanently in the ground? Does wireless and mobility not occur?
> I think it is easier to see the merit of location when one thinks about
> retrieving data. You need some clue as to where the data is.
More information about the end2end-interest