Re: The ecosystem is moving
Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> Sat, 14 May 2016 22:41 UTC
Return-Path: <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
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 E1B3612B030 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 May 2016 15:41:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FSL_HELO_HOME=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 rT0o1oustXxF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 May 2016 15:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server1.neighborhoods.net (server1.neighborhoods.net [207.154.13.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEF4112B01F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 14 May 2016 15:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by server1.neighborhoods.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5ACCCC45E; Sat, 14 May 2016 18:41:25 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-2.6.2 (20081215) (Debian) at neighborhoods.net
Received: from server1.neighborhoods.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (server1.neighborhoods.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id uSNsdx6Lx56b; Sat, 14 May 2016 18:41:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from Miless-MBP.fios-router.home (pool-108-26-191-201.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [108.26.191.201]) by server1.neighborhoods.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BE757CC43B; Sat, 14 May 2016 18:41:23 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: The ecosystem is moving
To: Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us>, ietf@ietf.org
References: <20160513165714.035DB1A4B7@ld9781.wdf.sap.corp> <alpine.LRH.2.20.1605131301300.10810@bofh.nohats.ca> <CAPt1N1=DOL7ysKb0pspZz+EbyVaVn=KCSeqQ=MBBU0vCXDcPpw@mail.gmail.com> <57361558.2010700@dcrocker.net> <CAPt1N1n6gh8r-jGWon9rmjkDENmbTmgG4TRfgT1z256DiZt3zg@mail.gmail.com> <5736307E.9000805@dcrocker.net> <389489ad-1f0c-3d2d-fd90-816507322e04@meetinghouse.net> <61E903B4-EC9F-433E-A4CF-FDF9183971D1@shockey.us>
From: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <e6100cf8-d084-402d-06d7-62e683c3f5fa@meetinghouse.net>
Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 18:41:23 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <61E903B4-EC9F-433E-A4CF-FDF9183971D1@shockey.us>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------33F2A4F13259BCCFE0A56749"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/dlK_U3ETDht1Rwpq4pxKC7U-QQc>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Sat, 14 May 2016 22:41:29 -0000
On 5/14/16 5:46 PM, Richard Shockey wrote: > In Line .. > Also in line. > > *From: *ietf <ietf-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Miles Fidelman > <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> > *Date: *Friday, May 13, 2016 at 9:38 PM > *To: *<ietf@ietf.org> > *Subject: *Re: The ecosystem is moving > > Back to the original point, for a moment: > > Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> <mailto:bortzmeyer@nic.fr> > Wed, 11 May 2016 12:58 UTCShow header > > > A very interesting paper (I said "intesresting", I didn't say I > agree!) on open networks where independant nodes with independently > developed programs interoperate thanks to standards. The author claims > closed and centralized systemes are better, because they allow faster > evolution (he uses security as an example). > > Many IETF cases mentioned (XMPP, IPv6, email...) > > https://whispersystems.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ > > > My long-standing observation is that the climate has changed. In the > early days, there was both "demand pull" for new protocols, and an > environment that encouraged (and to an extent) funded new protocol > development and deployment. > > Since then, the climate has changed: > > - it's very hard to get a new protocol into the ecosystem (there are > quite a few useful protocols, that simply are not supported) > > RS> Like security protocols? Dare I say it its harder and harder to > get any work done in standards bodies and the IETF in particular? We > have met the enemy and it is us… are we the new ITU? That is another > thread altogether. > > > > - the drivers have changed from greater interconnection and > interoperability (back to the original ARPANET drivers of resource > sharing and collaboration) - to "can it be monetized?" > > RS> Duh! Time to market. That said genuine interconnection and > interoperability still does have value. Both the internet and the > legacy as well as evolving global SIP voice network proves that. > There is a strong counter argument that long term value in global > communications, namely persistent revenue streams, are built on > globally interoperable services. ATT, DT, BT, FT, Bell, NTT etc have > not gone out of business, though they endlessly whine about losing > some of the value models. We can send them some cheese to go with > their whining. > Worse than that, I think. The first generation protocols were not driven my market at all - think Ray Tomlinson and email, or Tim Berners-Lee and HTTP. Nobody ever set out to make money from them - and nobody really has (except for some hosting). > In the short term Layer 7 silos can work, especially in closed user > communities, think instant messaging in the financial community and > secure public safety applications as you correctly point out but at > global scale you hit a wall eventually. > > It's simply a lot easier to deploy a new SaaS, behind an API, and to > charge for it, than it is to deploy new protocol infrastructure. > > RS> +1 That is certainly what is going on in Real-time Voice Services. > Think Skype in its original deployment. I noted that the piece called > out the reuse of phone numbers as persistent global identifiers for > service delivery. Oh Internet domains .. they are soooooo 90’s J > > I totally get that. TN’s are globally unique they are ubiquitous, > linguistically neutral and people have proven that if you use them > correctly you can make a boat load of money. WhatsApp? Wow use the > phone numbers and the existing national regulatory number allocation > regime. Centralize your application ..collect 8 Billion dollars and do > not pass GO. Works for me! Why didn’t I think of that? > > If I had 5 euro/dollars/pounds for every time I’ve heard “Phone > numbers are stupid” I be sitting in the sun in St. Barts or the South > of France with a cold glass of Champagne and would have resigned from > this list years ago. > > > > The exception seems to be when there is a strong "forcing function" - > applied top-down. DoD Force Transformation & the Command & Control > Research Program drove new operational models into the military > environment - into networks, into system specifications, and into > doctrine. Examples that come to mind: > - XMPP is widely used for tactical chat > - DIS is widely used to support distributed simulation and training - > including deployment of persistent training federations > - Tactical Data Links (e.g., Link-16) are all over the place > - DDS is widely used for sensor-weapon linkages > Also of note - NNTP remains widely used on the SIPRNET, at the top of > the MDMP (Military Decision Making Process) > > Another example that comes to mind is the Digital Libraries Initiative > - which forced a lot standards and protocols for library system > interoperability. > > IMHO, without such forcing functions, the natural tendency is toward > centralized, proprietary services - and back toward a world of walled > gardens. Even in areas where we have a measure of widespread > interoperability - such as calendaring - we see things like Google > pulling iCal support - making it ever so much more tedious to schedule > a meeting. > > RS> Excellent observation and spot on with the issue with iCal. Don’t > get me started with trying to sync Outlook for Mac with the rest of my > Apple device infrastructure. Gurrrrr. > For what it's worth - I'm starting to push the idea of some kind of equivalent to the CCRP or Digital Libraries initiative - time for a new forcing function. -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
- The ecosystem is moving Stephane Bortzmeyer
- 答复: The ecosystem is moving Hejianfei (Jeffrey)
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Paul Wouters
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Paul Wouters
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Dave Cridland
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Martin Rex
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Ted Lemon
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Dave Crocker
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Alia Atlas
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Dave Cridland
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Ted Lemon
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Dave Cridland
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Dave Crocker
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Ted Lemon
- Re: The ecosystem is moving John Levine
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Dave Crocker
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Matthew Kerwin
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Miles Fidelman
- Re: The ecosystem is moving ned+ietf
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Ted Lemon
- Re: The ecosystem is moving John Levine
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Richard Shockey
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Richard Shockey
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Miles Fidelman
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Dave Cridland
- Re: The ecosystem is moving Nico Williams