Re: [Int-area] Using ISO8473 as a network layer to carry flexible addresses

> On 3 Mar 2021, at 14:18, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
> 
> Carsten:
> 
> Thank you, fully agree. The first time i saw "backward compatibity" pop up in
> these discussions was in questions from ISOCI people in discussions
> about future evolution of IP/Internet - of course without any clear
> specification or reference as to what they actually meant with it.
> 
> Would be good to come up with more precise terminology around
> characerizations of relationships between stages of an evolutionary
> path in networking though.

+1

I think is a good idea. Would be nice to have something like that.
To be complete it should not look only at the “backward” part but also to the “forward” part, covering things like incremental deployability.

Ciao

L.

> 
> Then again, IETF isn't particularily fond of creating
> output that can not be hacked into C (oops: these days javascript).
> 
> But noting how NMRG is doing a fine jobs on trying to write down
> what Intent is (terminology/taxonomy), maybe there is a job
> for an IRTF group to do a similar job creating a better terminology
> to describe such evolutionary characteristics as they relate to
> networking. Otherwise it will continue to be hard to even talk about
> such networking evolution without being, as you said just be sidelined.
> 
> Cheers
>    Toerless
> 
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 08:46:09AM +0100, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>> On 2021-03-03, at 03:42, Liguangpeng (Roc, Network Technology Laboratory) <liguangpeng@huawei.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> backwards compatible
>> 
>> I would suggest not to center the discussion on terms that are so overloaded that they are essentially meaningless.
>> 
>> Some believe ???backwards compatible??? means ???does not break existing applications???. That is a low bar (but not trivial either).  It does not imply any form of deployability in the sense of actually making the scheme work.
>> 
>> Some believe ???backwards compatible??? means ???seamlessly integrates existing infrastructure??? (maybe with the exception that certain benefits do not accrue until that is upgraded).  That has essentially been the basis for all major innovation that has happened in the Internet, with the exception of IPv6 (and you know how long that took and still is taking in some parts of the world).
>> 
>> Terms like ???backwards compatible??? are, however, useful for derailing the discussion if that is one???s intention, because quickly the discussion will be about the terms and no longer about the subject.
>> 
>> Grüße, Carsten
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Int-area mailing list
>> Int-area@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
> 
> -- 
> ---
> tte@cs.fau.de
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area