[e2e] Switched Ethernet is Not an End-to-End System; was Protocols breaking the end-to-end argument

[Bob Braden]

Richard Bennett wrote:
> I'm not persuaded that the best engineering solution always wins the 
> prize, Bob: VHS vs. Beta for example. I think there's a lot of 
> evidence to suggest that non-engineering factors have had a lot to do 
> with the hegemony of TCP/IP.

Absolutely no question about that.There were half a dozen places along 
they way from 1978 when political/commercial forces could have limited 
or killed the Internet.  (And it could still happen) OTOH, the 
robustness of TCP in the world illustrates the power of (sophisticated) 
simplicity in design, and the power of decentralization.
>
> It's difficult to respond in detail to the following as much of it is 
> mid-sentence complaints about thing that happen to be answered in the 
> next phrase or so,

I am  sorry, that just is not true (that the next sentence answered the 
comment).
> but I will say I don't imply that the designers of internetworks 
> didn't think abstractly; Pouzin certainly did and still does.But I am 
> saying the argument that a particular sub-optimal design is best for a 
> production network

By picking out Pouzin (as an example (he deserves it, of course) you are 
subtly implying that Dave Clark, for example, does NOT think abstractly?
> because it happens to avoid fate-sharing or support innovation seems a 
> bit like grasping at straws.

Huh??
>
>
> Secure, reliable, and efficient networks support innovation best.

Not if they obtain security, reliability, and efficiency through 
centralized control and application-dependent networking..

Bob Braden
>
> RB
>