From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id c352f248 for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 23:34:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 2E9CD9B8AD; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 09:34:22 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29FE79B895; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 09:33:58 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="ZMKg+I/E"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 81A209B892; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 09:33:56 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-oi1-f176.google.com (mail-oi1-f176.google.com [209.85.167.176]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE95C9B891 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 09:33:55 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-oi1-f176.google.com with SMTP id v6so10169254oif.2 for ; Sun, 03 Feb 2019 15:33:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=wgC4I91IM4kSf9MDlxF1HQ53KIAp5pcJSNqoj6C0FcQ=; b=ZMKg+I/EJFXCdAm7845glHLH5VYpw4/6zEd6qtukGvDiUhxCa/5FFaFGWc34yHFTaL Q9O3CLPxzQqkDNhAYpLdHInX/vBcLkpUcJKMly+sCt/F/wPYa9j5Jm1x3bGwkg/suZns 17DPMWzddUT/il0h1d+iLd1GQFwpov2ryqZ57CJynAR+silCffz2BbD5BXVB9JNzJUe7 Sh36nCDiijgsPI/ey5Av1/FV/1JnhfqZ1R7vJ/tX63lEc1itv/+igQIa6S7rju9rKrBK jU/+GjsqOgEBd9WiKcgO08JHsQPgK3N68rV7oOuTcUkY+B1O86mb8zsfygjnXyFCNXyr 3k9g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=wgC4I91IM4kSf9MDlxF1HQ53KIAp5pcJSNqoj6C0FcQ=; b=jc/psbY5ItYGWhkbiVg7s3rol+hUstdo/QG/tQYAanUK2QpNRliQaVgAdTtKhayWiJ Wwx6PbC/l5Cn8GIjEtT4hhlBLx9JDBiWBBPd6XLpo98RzGGZU2j74EQhiwpsXGpi19In rbvIFgo2NNSuamFJ/DDMv/pwPtVmo2kUOlA4Mf3TAbwyXkSUCac4sFdVMEb+UV4yIPo3 xjA4G+9OVzgURTTSGDa2NrE5keL8RfCJPP1EqCFJif2nbrG7ZTlQVpvfvUCN/CiThQn7 xgmMtOhNBCCfj/bLVBGzy+YP6xiVdK9hIhspzMVlPcGeruDkNk0h1HIom5hiZ9upovTe SLSw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukdllZrSED50oVD3ke1nYGRMlEr+yKVpt5fvRAtmh0CvCCCKnyaq /yyRbhhrqYoIyykuGl71n68IE1obP/4E25kXCQkLzYkQM70= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN5zsbmF/XcU1X00bu/JQqHC4YZZZFDsmEwYbbnPjeP4qgxsaty1M8i+2389gMBGAkKRg5eRWBodi/ss+PYzSno= X-Received: by 2002:aca:3541:: with SMTP id c62mr23702962oia.330.1549236834843; Sun, 03 Feb 2019 15:33:54 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Mantas_Mikul=C4=97nas?= Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 01:33:43 +0200 Message-ID: To: TUHS , Noel Chiappa Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [TUHS] Signal/noise (Was: OSI stack (Was: Posters)) X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 5:03 PM Noel Chiappa wrote= : > > > From: Warner Losh > > > a bunch of OSI/ISO network stack posters (thank goodness that didn'= t > > become standard, woof!) > > Why? The details have faded from my memory, but the lower 2 layers of the > stack (CLNP and TP4) I don't recall as being too bad. (The real block to > adoption was that people didn't want to get snarled up in the ISO standar= ds > process.) > > It at least managed (IIRC) to separate the concepts of, and naming for, '= node' > and 'network interface' (which is more than IPv6 managed, apparently on t= he > grounds that 'IPv4 did it that way', despite lengthy pleading that in lig= ht of > increased understanding since IPv4 was done, they were separate concepts = and > deserved separate namespaces). Yes, the allocation of the names used by t= he > path selection (I use that term because to too many people, 'routing' mea= ns > 'packet forwarding') was a total dog's breakast (allocation by naming > authority - the very definition of 'brain-damaged') but TCP/IP's was not = any > better, really. > > Yes, the whole session/presentation/application thing was ponderous and p= robably > over-complicated, but that could have been ditched and simpler things run > directly on TP4. > > {And apologies for the non-Unix content, but at least it's about computer= s, > unlike all the postings about Jimmy Page's guitar; typical of the really = poor > S/N on this list.) > With apologies for the outburst: When I first subscribed to tuhs several years ago (even though I don't really belong in here; I'm younger than even Linux, much less any of the Unixen), I *very much* enjoyed reading the various stories about UUCP, about Sun, about X11, VMS, ARPAnet =E2=80=93 often first-hand tales, = no less. So I don't know what counts as 'signal' on this list versus 'noise', but I'd much rather read a million posts about OSI, CLNP and other networks =E2=80=93 a history lesson and information that's been getting sca= rce in general =E2=80=93 than kill/mute yet another thread full of generic "boo= M$ Windoze" drivel that I can already find on Reddit. Thanks, --=20 Mantas Mikul=C4=97nas