Re: new directions in mlm traffic: integration

Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Sun, 10 January 2021 07:53 UTC

Return-Path: <moore@network-heretics.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B82673A0E60 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Jan 2021 23:53:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.88
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.88 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.262, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.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 E51xV5sbgh5d for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Jan 2021 23:53:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE01F3A0E55 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 9 Jan 2021 23:53:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD78B5C009C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 02:53:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 10 Jan 2021 02:53:05 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=E94odFTxyLIGh57i2SUKtuqsZLjf7mThz1I9wbf+v HM=; b=mx0tduWsc+iN4SvUU0NX+b+swlwqexR9WCvF48+nu5KJylYpplkjOG9Lr 9ZMSrBD6REZuAqokU7rRIxYshluoAQDJ2TKTfsxbEq2KlCJ8a/wyfQKcq78PyzoK 1oNtPeUiIhNQg09Hm+kpZ4WsHhBe5C+YoszoTHws/rMS/U+1RkuKGpe9rBeJwejE CpOJjjsYAUQksrW3jJ/LjhGMYNucFYh7P9SUlJQ+Uk71MWOlJ/9EVOFn1z3SiGbK 0rvKWP2dE5SQQKs08Xl9ysL12YA3S6VVlyACdxIy9+5btnoQFP0ySRrOHcIvb+3S /e1Ihz3rBjmYfyTduuCBBHYRumAXw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:YbL6X1NPzRykuoWrqXSJ6uAqBGD1TnrjIuN8hYZkTtAOLyjxcuoe-A> <xme:YbL6X390KRvYrlPvJGxPM613p2K_irkz1L00MjVyZ2IVrZnKb6Z799s6dLvLfI4Va hm1JVnM5vG_Xg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrvdegkedguddugecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepuffvfhfhkffffgggjggtgfesth ekredttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepmfgvihhthhcuofhoohhrvgcuoehmohhorhgvsehnvght fihorhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhephefhuedthe efgfefgffhkeehgfeugfeiudeugeejkeefleelueeiffetfeeuudeunecukfhppedutdek rddvvddurddukedtrdduheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmh grihhlfhhrohhmpehmohhorhgvsehnvghtfihorhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:YbL6X0QMxU3styjbdI6-lmV46LWjRuIIWRP23mDn_5ewmxz8rLNBmw> <xmx:YbL6Xxu9frHLhOmWnjVPOI_JbduJbaDTpP1GZbFDd1jx9X59mx0TPw> <xmx:YbL6X9eKBGyMhKEQQaFIftwfuxKMECZWEPhxcGF6Kku67ope6JUmxg> <xmx:YbL6X48-aOqEtHogoBVOwQzOiLAodkK3uSzc7VvkjNprHZ3HlI-Tvg>
Received: from [192.168.1.97] (108-221-180-15.lightspeed.knvltn.sbcglobal.net [108.221.180.15]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E4B9A108005F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 02:53:04 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: new directions in mlm traffic: integration
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <20210110031922.92D4B68A9C94@ary.qy>
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Message-ID: <747a7e6f-b22f-c334-c8d2-2450fefcb397@network-heretics.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2021 02:53:03 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210110031922.92D4B68A9C94@ary.qy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/USF7AyIdirkW0qGwVnyHQi_bAms>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2021 07:53:08 -0000

On 1/9/21 10:19 PM, John Levine wrote:

>   We already have too much custom bespoke stuff for applications that aren't really all that unusual.

I've seen this particular handwaving argument too many times, always 
without any support, and have come to seriously question its validity.

I suspect that the argument is at least equally valid when flipped 
around - we are already too dependent on applications that aren't a 
great fit for what is needed, and either aren't adaptable to better suit 
our needs or are adaptable only at great expense. The tendency to adopt 
proprietary applications rather than "bespoke" ones paints us into 
corners, restricts our ability to change, increases our costs, and has a 
potential of siloing different kinds of information in ways that 
hamstring the ability to use them together.   Indeed, this is _exactly_ 
what I see in every organization I work with that adopts commercial 
communications tools.  (Slack is just one sad example.)

So basically, this kind of argument simply doesn't hold water without 
analysis.

Keith