Friendly Balkanization....
mo@bellcore.com Fri, 18 December 1992 15:10 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05202; 18 Dec 92 10:10 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05196; 18 Dec 92 10:10 EST
Received: from babyoil.ftp.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12400; 18 Dec 92 10:12 EST
Received: from mailee.bellcore.com by ftp.com with SMTP id AA06188; Fri, 18 Dec 92 10:05:20 -0500
Received: from gizmo.bellcore.com by mailee.bellcore.com (5.61/1.34) id AA05847; Fri, 18 Dec 92 10:04:52 -0500
Message-Id: <9212181504.AA05847@mailee.bellcore.com>
To: kasten@ftp.com
Cc: tli@cisco.com, criteria@ftp.com
Subject: Friendly Balkanization....
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 10:04:50 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: mo@bellcore.com
Actually, the "friendly balkanization" that you describe (multiple nets with applications gateways) has been the case for quite some time in specific cases. To wit: The EMail nets have almost always been multi-protocol and mail application gateways have been the norm since at least the mid-late 70s. The most visible clumps in that galaxy include the fully-connected SMTP cloud, the UUCP cloud, the FIDONET cloud, the BITnet cloud, the commercial Email providers clouds, and others more obscure but just as connected. In general, unless one pings a nameserver, one seldom actually knows what vehicles will be involved in delivering a given piece of mail. The Internet DNS does a great service far beyond its direct reach. For "news" applications, USENET and FIDONET are both in there, as are others. Most of these are cross-connected to an amazing degree, and yes, header munging is awful and unclean and should be avoided at all costs, but it works to an equally amazing degree. Now that there are servers which respond to ftp requests sent via EMail, the applications one migh class as "bit-vending" are working trans-protocol universe. Other gateways (FTP/NFS, FTP/FTAM, etc, etc) are happening as well. Admittedly this level of interconnection works best for services where latency can be tolerated, but the Internet Gopher work is busily sewing together lots of interactive but previously-disjoint services under a common service delivery protocol and interface. Adding arbitrary gateways is relatively easy, and gateways exist between Gopher and TELNET-based services, Gopher and FTP, Gopher and WAIS, Gopher and ARCHIE, Gopher and News, and as soon as a service pops up in some other alternate universe of sufficient interest, someone will build the gateway. Note that I'm not claiming any of this is perfect, and given the choice, one would prefer ubiquitous direct interoperability. While it is a grand goal, and one which we should vigorously pursue, it is unattainable any time soon, and given that, the growing web of applications gateways, bridging the transport and semantic gaps between various network fabrics is indeed doing a great service bringing us all together. -Mike O'Dell Bellcore?? Bellcore isn't allowed opinions. Any found here are merely my mad ravings.