Re: [arch-d] Adoption of draft-thomson-use-it-or-lose-it

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Tue, 28 May 2019 17:01 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.com>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B280120188 for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 May 2019 10:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.218
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.218 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XVitIfhxCuZJ for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 May 2019 10:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-3.web-hosting.com (server217-3.web-hosting.com [198.54.115.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94FCE12013D for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 May 2019 10:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=8yriARfbpHivpVZBz7GO3ZKZHL5xe12zm+O2yJpTmd0=; b=uUdCPdv/VFs0hutRgur1bHbLB 5RTtOVlU8y8bNPWjzL6DJJ3jtoUFSHzM93N4FWGw/sdPAWBFAR2jA4QVHiGM1VWTP0NjMQW1RnVAn ffWFj4xAdNmR7b405ENjLrAs98uBSvK+wyXjopxzvpwbeQ+VWosNQzyW7seOTbudVxPrC+JDXtU5s NfwY3ZFjtYX78jntmaVisYTJz14Nxsv0W2WCoDRI9pxIimaPcIT/6ggDQDe3F079lhBbdnxqKMuhS IZXnPo9pMFqO7TMN54gJYLMBlHwQHE66VPmpWlukAuviXwseIJlRBvWRSGtcu3JQuSvtH7F8YoU8I p7bV6eN3A==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-240-132.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.240.132]:52637 helo=[192.168.1.77]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1hVfTN-000IrG-80; Tue, 28 May 2019 13:01:17 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5FD85BF7-394B-4998-A988-40F584D39D93"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <720A7A1304B044F5791A766D@PSB>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 10:01:12 -0700
Cc: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>, architecture-discuss@ietf.org
Message-Id: <465F8551-C59D-49DA-8CE3-B145FBEAA372@strayalpha.com>
References: <19b3da4b-bc51-4b5d-baec-c2d9c4d5db5d@www.fastmail.com> <720A7A1304B044F5791A766D@PSB>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/0cJaEiBmsSuigbNCDCq_cXvHfLc>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] Adoption of draft-thomson-use-it-or-lose-it
X-BeenThere: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <architecture-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/architecture-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 17:01:20 -0000

+1

> On May 28, 2019, at 9:04 AM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:
> 
> While I applaud your, and the IAB's, efforts to try to sort
> these things out and provide guidance

I do not. IMO, the IAB has no privileged perspective other than a soapbox on which to pontificate and repeatedly proves so.

> I see some danger of the
> IAB, with this document and others, moving off in the direction
> of grand pronouncements that are disconnected with reality;
> comments that seem to imply that, if only the IAB's statements
> and procedures are followed, all will be well.


Agreed, e.g.: 

2.0 suggests that new protocol extensions are preferable to fixing bugs. 2.2 implies we accept hijacking and fails to recognize how (and arguably why) HTTPS has already supplanted HTTP.

The rest can be summarized by Berkeley’s question of whether a tree falling in a vacant forest makes a sound*.

Bugs are bugs. Design flaws are design flaws. Too much effort is spent ignorant of the difference, here and throughout the IETF.

That said, this doc should proceed, if only to highlight the value of IAB advice.

Joe

*if we’re going to be philosophical; but preferably, let’s not.