[9fans] ieee authentication standard

[9fans] ieee authentication standard

[ron minnich]

I don't know how many of you see this stuff, but ...

http://tinyurl.com/234l92

Our industry is into this "every little thing is different" mode it seems.

ron

Re: [9fans] ieee authentication standard

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 291 bytes --]

On 10/30/07, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I don't know how many of you see this stuff, but ...
>
> http://tinyurl.com/234l92
>
> Our industry is into this "every little thing is different" mode it seems.
>
> ron
>

If that were true... what's with XML everywhere?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 615 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] ieee authentication standard

[erik quanstrom]

>>
>> I don't know how many of you see this stuff, but ...
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/234l92
>>
>> Our industry is into this "every little thing is different" mode it seems.
>>
>> ron
>>
> 
> If that were true... what's with XML everywhere?

this isn't slashdot.  you're supposed to read the article
before commenting.

- erik

Re: [9fans] ieee authentication standard

[erik quanstrom]

> > 
> > If that were true... what's with XML everywhere?
> 
> this isn't slashdot.  you're supposed to read the article
> before commenting.
> 
> - erik
> 

what the article outlines is a meta standard that makes no
decision on authentication for pluggable storage.  it just
outlines a layer of goo ontop of the undefined authentication
standards.

this kind of standard reminds me of acpi.

- erik

Re: [9fans] ieee authentication standard

[ron minnich]

On 10/30/07, erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com> wrote:

> what the article outlines is a meta standard that makes no
> decision on authentication for pluggable storage.  it just
> outlines a layer of goo ontop of the undefined authentication
> standards.
>
> this kind of standard reminds me of acpi.

Yeah. I just watch this stuff go by, in continuous flow. I'm seeing it
now with NFS. It's just more and more crud piled higher and higher.
The perceived solution to problems with software is to add more
software, in each case, which is why (e.g.) Linux kernel is growing
*exponentially*.

I keep thinking there has to be a way to call a halt, but I don't know how.

Ah well, just another rant, but it's interesting to see how far and
wide this stuff is spreading.

ron

Re: [9fans] ieee authentication standard

[Bakul Shah]

> > this kind of standard reminds me of acpi.
> 
> Yeah. I just watch this stuff go by, in continuous flow.

Why would you want to do that?  Watch I mean.

>                                                          I'm seeing it
> now with NFS. It's just more and more crud piled higher and higher.
> The perceived solution to problems with software is to add more
> software, in each case, which is why (e.g.) Linux kernel is growing
> *exponentially*.

They got to keep up with the Gateses.

> I keep thinking there has to be a way to call a halt, but I don't know how.

You can't.  Let it go.  It is time to embrace meditation or
yoga or Prozac.

Re: [9fans] ieee authentication standard

[erik quanstrom]

> Yeah. I just watch this stuff go by, in continuous flow. I'm seeing it
> now with NFS. It's just more and more crud piled higher and higher.
> The perceived solution to problems with software is to add more
> software, in each case, which is why (e.g.) Linux kernel is growing
> *exponentially*.
> 
> I keep thinking there has to be a way to call a halt, but I don't know how.
> 
> Ah well, just another rant, but it's interesting to see how far and
> wide this stuff is spreading.

i think there's a view that standards are stackable.  there's nothing wrong
with this per ce.  but, really, why should i have to print out 1 foot of
standards to figure out how (e.g.) ipmi consoles work.

not everything these days has gone that way.  ahci is a pretty good
standard.  a modern, generic way to talk to sata drives with hot plug
with just a few registers.

would have been better without ncq, though.

- erik

Re: [9fans] ieee authentication standard

[Christian Kellermann]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 820 bytes --]

* erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> [071030 17:59]:
> 
> i think there's a view that standards are stackable.  there's nothing wrong
> with this per ce.  but, really, why should i have to print out 1 foot of
> standards to figure out how (e.g.) ipmi consoles work.
> 
Well DVB standards or DMB standards are some examples of this sort.
DVB-H is my favorite. They even consider this a feature called
'Multiprotocol Encapsulation': Take your IP based RTP Stream, pack it into an
MPEG-TS, pack this into packets and air it. Of course each with their own error
protection... All for the sake of staying in the 'IP World' for
receivers...Did I hear someone calling 'Bingo!' just now...?


Christian

-- 
You may use my gpg key for replies:
pub  1024D/47F79788 2005/02/02 Christian Kellermann (C-Keen)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 194 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] ieee authentication standard

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 808 bytes --]

On 10/30/07, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> I don't know how many of you see this stuff, but ...
> >>
> >> http://tinyurl.com/234l92
> >>
> >> Our industry is into this "every little thing is different" mode it
> seems.
> >>
> >> ron
> >>
> >
> > If that were true... what's with XML everywhere?
>
> this isn't slashdot.  you're supposed to read the article
> before commenting.
>
> - erik
>
> I was rather commenting on the comment about the trend in the industry to
"every little thing is different".
Of course if something in the industry are all the same b/c of XML, and
everything else is different, I suppose that holds.

Reminds me of that scene in The Life of Brian  where a mob says "Yes we are
all different" then the lone voice says "I'm not"

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1350 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] ieee authentication standard

[Charles Forsyth]

> Of course if something in the industry are all the same b/c of XML, and
> everything else is different, I suppose that holds.

there are quite often different and even unrelated XML representations for the
same things