[e2e] Why don't we talk about segments/objects instaead of layers? Re: Lost Layer?

Detlef Bosau detlef.bosau at web.de
Tue Feb 18 06:16:58 PST 2014

Am 18.02.2014 04:47, schrieb David P. Reed:
> The interdomain issue is crucial. The point of the Internet is that it
> is not owned or controlled by a single entity. Period. There is no
> global agreement on any measure of optimality. If there were, then it

You're mixing up things here.

The Internet is not controlled by a single entity ("oh that bad
telcos....") but it requires a consistent agreements on protocols.

Your argument sounds a bit like: "Oh, the WTC towers are burning? Let
them burn, calling the fire brigade is prohibited for political reasons."

To my understanding, Cerf's catenet model required a certain amount of
interoperability between concatenated networks, this is even the reason
for IP. (However: IP dropped quite some requirements from the catenet
model, sometimes even silently.)

When you talk about waste of time, David it may sound harsh, but when a
system model is wrong, there is an old saying:

"If you see that you're riding a dead horse, dismount".

And you might never forgive me that sentence and declare me for stupid
or ill, but the more I think about it, the end to end religion is not
only a dead horse, it is horse butcher's bonanza.

And what's particularly embarrassing with this approach is that we CS
guys are not the only ones in the world to deal with control problems,
there are similar issues in other disciplines as well. And nobody,
absolutely nobody, controls a complex system only at the end points.
This is not even an academic insight, this is high school physics.

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list