Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful
Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Thu, 09 May 2019 09:34 UTC
Return-Path: <lear@cisco.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 7623C12004E; Thu, 9 May 2019 02:34:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 xVDGKhg1oUhS; Thu, 9 May 2019 02:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F19612007C; Thu, 9 May 2019 02:34:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6182; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1557394445; x=1558604045; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc: to:references; bh=yDCcSmVt2JtEGsMsoG76tfKROgPcGsASjYswKcNLwSU=; b=Cn4mikAG75mT1K3q2FOedn6X8/HTY+trkN+Ay42DPZMjybb12+kKGjpb XIDS8QetZyMiyL7cwOpHMD2RFCgsqqHktOhwNCVS655/y2lC09LLrhgjw o8gqBCIMfYjNDVPBzysdEOIoLv1er5hLi1eYf3le2j7Vaa5mmNeRE2jE7 s=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 195
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BAAACw8tNc/xbLJq1kGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAQGBZYJ6UiASKIQRiHuLfiWSWId2AgcBAQEJAwEBGAEKDAEBg3pGAoIrOBMBAwEBBAEBAgEEbRwMhUoBAQEDAQEBIUsLBQsJAgQKBAYqAgInIg4GE4MiAYF7Dw+ROZtlgS+FR4RcCgaBMoFPhzaCYIF/gREnDBOCTD6CYQEBgTuDMDKCJgSLSYFghWmUMAmCC4IGgQKPShQHlVeDcJozgngCBAYFAhWBZiGBVjMaCBsVOyoBgkE+ilSFQT0DMI05glEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,449,1549929600"; d="asc'?scan'208,217";a="11973449"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 09 May 2019 09:34:02 +0000
Received: from ams3-vpn-dhcp4430.cisco.com (ams3-vpn-dhcp4430.cisco.com [10.61.81.77]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x499Y14R026908 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 9 May 2019 09:34:02 GMT
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <E7769BC3-472E-4161-85C9-E534C9E393EC@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5D0FCCB4-DB5E-4423-BC40-1DAE5FB746F2"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.8\))
Subject: Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful
Date: Thu, 09 May 2019 11:34:00 +0200
In-Reply-To: <EDB037CE-F16A-4392-B36C-F44E30F29753@tzi.org>
Cc: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>, "architecture-discuss@ietf.org" <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>, "iab@iab.org" <iab@iab.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
References: <F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C89F024CD3@MISOUT7MSGUSRDE.ITServices.sbc.com> <CALaySJJDHg5j9Z7+noS=YXoNROqdsbJ6coEECtLtbJ6fWJ3xsQ@mail.gmail.com> <DBD4837F-299B-497C-8922-AFF858B06C0F@strayalpha.com> <EDB037CE-F16A-4392-B36C-F44E30F29753@tzi.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.8)
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.61.81.77, ams3-vpn-dhcp4430.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: aer-core-1.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/eBq-ogg_C1mnHBh8CRwSlDiDtik>
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: Thu, 09 May 2019 09:34:09 -0000
I like Martin’s draft, although I would frame things a bit differently. There is an aspect of maturity to all of this. Martin’s experience is with web-related protocols that are largely mature. In those cases, it simply is not possible for FF/Chrone/… to accommodate most errors or ambiguities because the code path is already quite complex and represents a large attack surface. I view QUIC largely as an evolution of the existing well known system. On the other hand, early work is quite difficult to nail down. Getting something to work at all requires Postel’s principle. That’s not a matter of programmer or spec writer laziness, but simply a matter of lack of experience everyone’s part. Let’s not emotionally claim that protocol immaturity introduces a “technical deficit”. The bell telephone standard arguably had no technical deficits for what it delivered, but it delivered bubkas compared to what we have today, “deficits" and all. In the next rev, what would be good to see is how and when the principle should be applied, and the other principles that may also conflict with or limit this one. Eliot > On 8 May 2019, at 07:26, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote: > > Like the end-to-end principle, the robustness principle is one of the most misunderstood, misapplied design principles in networking. That doesn’t make either principle wrong, it just seems they need good explanations. Documenting the results of misapplying the robustness principle (including the degenerated end state that I call “soup”) is a good thing, but should be done under the correct heading. “Deprecating” it is not. > > Grüße, Carsten > > _______________________________________________ > Architecture-discuss mailing list > Architecture-discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss
- RE: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Barry Leiba
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Barry Leiba
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Warren Kumari
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Tony Li
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Stephen Farrell
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Adam Roach
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Salz, Rich
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Adam Roach
- Re: [IAB] [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle… Christian Huitema
- Re: [IAB] [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Matthew Kerwin
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Rich Kulawiec
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] [IAB] deprecating Postel's principle… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Christian Huitema
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Mark Andrews
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Martin Thomson
- Re: [arch-d] [IAB] deprecating Postel's principle… Randy Bush
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Masataka Ohta
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Dave Cridland
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Jari Arkko
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… John C Klensin
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Paul Wouters
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Dave Cridland
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Dave Cridland
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Bless, Roland (TM)
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Paul Wouters
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… John Levine
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Keith Moore
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Keith Moore
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… John C Klensin
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Martin Thomson
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… S Moonesamy
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Lloyd Wood
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Eliot Lear
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Eliot Lear
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Bob Briscoe
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Masataka Ohta
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Aaron Falk
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henry S. Thompson