IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Wed, 08 May 2019 14:36 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 855CF120129; Wed, 8 May 2019 07:36:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.219
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.219 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_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 O18QG6AdVQjD; Wed, 8 May 2019 07:36:54 -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 8E45412010C; Wed, 8 May 2019 07:36:54 -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=xBeocwXVWwaAl+tf9kuYMh5IoCxHyBq/0YUSEDGvtL8=; b=ERK1JPwrs/XLCuHP225vaN0Gz PDg2TdAnAkMRoDJWwdS/O4c5w7R1PP/DiXYjv0s8WdwYbKGDJcrdaylrUcJKffQSX5pRx+I3loMBV lOKWTJtX39IvODOOTirsUxVqWq4ozl3Fuum2tdTRth6UQ6XiuUGz1sE9q7VeuAdllTpb+am3wChlE eqqxcm/i/I58bUuU/QFUhYe8ikkoKgLCgpE6vaFnXYx4VfMecDrkFyA2F8gx7CrBXzG8MNnrc+2oJ STJjplC5J7H4KCejKG7R4lon/Z2SkEtl5odgT9s4ayQunl5yWQPfu43YOswIXuijOwBJehzO1zknc HwchmGCsQ==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-240-132.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.240.132]:53219 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 1hONgd-0039Sq-RM; Wed, 08 May 2019 10:36:52 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_85004257-C931-4B15-A855-53C654B92CF8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <9b590e5f-907f-79bd-8aaa-86bf8a9dc446@kit.edu>
Date: Wed, 08 May 2019 07:36:46 -0700
Cc: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, "architecture-discuss@ietf.org" <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>, "iab@iab.org" <iab@iab.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <0D0CA9B6-2FBA-4281-953A-F21F0BF04398@strayalpha.com>
References: <F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C89F024CD3@MISOUT7MSGUSRDE.ITServices.sbc.com> <CALaySJJDHg5j9Z7+noS=YXoNROqdsbJ6coEECtLtbJ6fWJ3xsQ@mail.gmail.com> <DBD4837F-299B-497C-8922-AFF858B06C0F@strayalpha.com> <EDB037CE-F16A-4392-B36C-F44E30F29753@tzi.org> <9b590e5f-907f-79bd-8aaa-86bf8a9dc446@kit.edu>
To: "Bless, Roland (TM)" <roland.bless@kit.edu>
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/GiIdEzHGqgUsm-ce-5HYWI4BmsY>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful
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: Wed, 08 May 2019 14:36:56 -0000


> On May 8, 2019, at 7:24 AM, Bless, Roland (TM) <roland.bless@kit.edu> wrote:
> 
> I always understood it in the way it is described in RFC 1122:
> 
>         Software should be written to deal with every conceivable
>         error, no matter how unlikely; sooner or later a packet will
>         come in with that particular combination of errors and
>         attributes, and unless the software is prepared, chaos can
>         ensue.

I’ve always agreed with that perspective, however...

>         …In general, it is best to assume that the network is
>         filled with malevolent entities that will send in packets
>         designed to have the worst possible effect.

This is, IMO, where even one of the most cited interpretations goes off the rails.

Don’t assume malice where incompetence can suffice. 

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email