Re: inquiry re. the state of protocol R&D

"Carlos M. Martinez" <> Mon, 26 May 2014 19:51 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A8891A024B for <>; Mon, 26 May 2014 12:51:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SVSS6EpGsuGl for <>; Mon, 26 May 2014 12:51:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E4691A023D for <>; Mon, 26 May 2014 12:51:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id t59so6787200yho.1 for <>; Mon, 26 May 2014 12:50:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=A3PJEEaQos6xNfG4NCpouBNc61fhE/jPfxD7+QbiHek=; b=p119ACDKwx/cv6sCTJZPuE5BBMu5BPbeEvgFYcyiDdqRhucspuqYhqDQpY9LR5AJN3 nA+rK2hUqTBViFsHe4WU/qGv/nb5+Hy3Xs8DXSrFrc9TUyLryd8bTAx+qcFNTXcDM1ZB T1C5LMmUtGLBa6I2C8LAJaFqJRl+nhLaMTjXcfH3wNNFKBsOI6dkbbTp2QwKEJzvytWJ FNY/I5QHE400JhHx4oP53J2ZpxuoojTsIu1qm2uUqgVO9V6OqneYPYPge8k/44TG3VIj A/X4ygKrDh15yzgeREV9pqn1dtRRaks6wVXWDz84NbvWKFKHWU6JxKUlIlZPX2imMQ0y JnRg==
X-Received: by with SMTP id f21mr38948271yhf.94.1401133857561; Mon, 26 May 2014 12:50:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTPSA id l66sm19294576yhc.54.2014. for <> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 26 May 2014 12:50:56 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 16:50:54 -0300
From: "Carlos M. Martinez" <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: inquiry re. the state of protocol R&D
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 19:51:02 -0000

A world of APIs is a good thing. As long as the APIs are public and well
documented and, well, standardized.

I believe this is an evolutionary step. After you get a solid foundation
of interoperable IP and transport protocols, the next logical step is to
standardize APIs.

What lies behind the API is bound to be propietary, IMO.



On 5/24/14, 1:24 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> For a while, it's been kind of bugging me that the Internet ecosystem is
> increasingly a world of API's tied to proprietary systems - quite
> different than the world of interoperable protocols.  Sure, every once
> in a while something new comes along - like RSS and XMPP, but that's
> more at the fringes - and in a lot of cases we see attempts at things by
> folks who really don't have a clue (open social comes to mind). (And, of
> course, very specific things like, say DMARC.)
> Obviously, a lot of this is driven by commercial factors - there's money
> to be made in centralizing systems and monetizing APIs; not so much for
> protocols.  And it seems like there isn't a lot of R&D funding for such
> things.
> Which leads me to wonder - is there much of a protocol r&d community
> left - academic or otherwise?  IRTF seems awfully narrowly focused - and
> mostly at lower layers of the protocol stack.  Where's the work on
> application protocols (beyond refinements to HTTP, and web service
> stuff)?  Are there still funders for this kind of work?
> If so, where do folks "congregate?"  For programming languages, there's
>, conferences like OOPSLA, and there
> seems to be a steady stream of academic papers.  Is there anything left
> like that for protocol R&D?
> Miles Fidelman