Reed's views, was [e2e] Cannara's views

[Vernon Schryver]

> From: John Day <day at std.com>

> ...
> One other thing on the SNA and PTT topic and then we can drop it. 
> Is it just me or is it really the case?  But it seems that there are 
> number of very big companies trying to push these models on to the 
> Net and getting a lot of support in all sorts of places, including 
> the IETF.   There is a big database company that keeps trying to make 
> the Net look like SNA.  And even more surprising, router companies 
> talking like phone companys about putting more "intelligence in the 
> network." 

Consider also the enthusiasm for end-user ISP terms that prohibit any
sort of "server."   If you can't tolerate servers at the edges of the
net, then you have a completely centralized, client/server world view.

Few seem willing to oppose SMTP and HTTP redirection proxies and port
25 filtering in the names of "saving bandwidth," "being a good neighbor,"
and stopping a little spam from the 100-200 "relay raping" spammers
world-wide.  What network has more intelligence than one that has GBytes
of web pages, and that forces you to accept it's notion of what you want
instead of what you requested?  What is network is more in the style of
SNA than one in which all mail transfer agents run on a few dozen servers
operated by the biggest ISP's?


>            There are all sorts of projects in the IETF that have more 
> of PTT flavor than an Internet flavor.  And I don't really see any 
> counter coming from the good guys.
>
> Are we in danger of succumbing to the dark side?

At best, yes.


Vernon Schryver    vjs at rhyolite.com