<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7652.24">
<TITLE>RE: [e2e] end to end arguments in systems design</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Jon,<BR>
<BR>
I think the prevailing consensus is "who cares?"<BR>
<BR>
I've recently noticed that RFCs can get published without any<BR>
reference to how end-to-to-end reliability is ensured, even when<BR>
it's extremely relevant to the protocol being described and the<BR>
design decisions made for that protocol. This is not good -<BR>
particularly when detailing a new transport protocol or<BR>
entire architecture. Error detection and reliability can't just<BR>
be ignored.<BR>
<BR>
An 'Implications for end-to-end reliability' section should imo<BR>
be mandated to sit alongside the security implications<BR>
section in all RFCs.<BR>
<BR>
L.<BR>
<BR>
<<A HREF="http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/">http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/</A>><L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: end2end-interest-bounces@postel.org on behalf of Jon Crowcroft<BR>
Sent: Thu 2007-12-06 14:23<BR>
To: e2e IRTF list<BR>
Subject: [e2e] end to end arguments in systems design<BR>
<BR>
I havnt seen any email on this list for days now, and before that<BR>
traffic here has been steadily decreasing over the last few years.<BR>
<BR>
does this mean that the "arguments" are over?<BR>
<BR>
did I miss the conclusion? who won? who lost?<BR>
<BR>
meanwhile, life gets more complex...<BR>
<A HREF="http://people.redhat.com/drepper/cpumemory.pdf">http://people.redhat.com/drepper/cpumemory.pdf</A><BR>
<BR>
...and yet simpler...<BR>
<A HREF="http://research.microsoft.com/research/pubs/view.aspx?tr_id=1389">http://research.microsoft.com/research/pubs/view.aspx?tr_id=1389</A><BR>
<BR>
and yet applications burgeon....<BR>
just in the internet supported inter-personal communications space,<BR>
we have...<BR>
<BR>
email, IM, sms, facebook, myspace, twitter, wiki, blogs, rss, pub/sub,<BR>
pstn/cell/phone/voip/skype, pdas, pagers, and PVRs,<BR>
and others, all of which can alert us in new and wonderful ways - i'd quite like a funnel<BR>
<BR>
so I could pipe together all the events and then aggregate them in some semantically<BR>
rich way...of course, virtually none of them is e2e:)<BR>
<BR>
j.<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>