Re: [hrpc] new title for draft-tenoever-hrpc-political

[Andrew Sullivan <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 07:30:55AM -0400, Tony Rutkowski wrote:
> As to the telephone networks being internetworks - it would be devise a
> construct that excluded them.  It's worth noting that the backplane
> signalling component - currently SS7 or its equivalent  - were the first
> large-scale implementation of connectionless datagram protocols - the
> basic definition used by DARPA and OSI internets.

The definition that I was using (which you quoted) did not depend on
connectionless datagram protocols.  Indeed, I think you could make an
internet out of a connection-oriented protocol, and I'm not even sure
that a datagram protocol is a necessary condition for an internet
(though it seems like a good idea).  Part of the definition I'm
arguing for here includes a measure of policy consideration: the
non-reliance on transitive and pre-existing contractual relationships
all along the path.  Telephone networks are, in my reading,
fundamentally dependent on such relationships by design.

> diverse networks along the path between endpoints.  There is also the
> irony that the first  RFC on tagging DARPA host address - what done by
> Jim White and he invokes telephone networks as the model.

I don't understand how an analogy someone used once is any evidence of
anything in this discussion.

>  A further
> irony is the use of ENUM on DARPA internets to resolve telephony end points.

There is no question that you can encapsulate other kinds of network
traffic in an internet, but I don't see how that's any kind of
evidence that the other kinds of networks thereby become part of the
used internet.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[e-mail]