Re: [Tsvwg] RE: iSCSI: No Framing

["Brian F. G. Bidulock" <bidulock@openss7.org>]

Douglas,

On Wed, 06 Feb 2002, Douglas Otis wrote:

[snip]
> > Please Doug, if there is a technical (not political) basis
> > on which this draft is somehow flawed, please express it.
> > You seem so vehemenently opposed to this draft over the
> > last number of months: surely there is some technical basis
> > upon which your first aversions were based.
> 
> I think that the concept of network layering where functions are concisely
> defined is a technical aspect and not a political one.  That does not mean,
> there are not politics at play.  When you introduce a layer below the
> transport that manipulates a partial data stream on behalf of the
> application, you have thrown the concept of layering out the window.  This
> goes well beyond techniques already on the fridge such as packet filters or
> ALGs within NATs.  Here you would have continuous interchange between this
> S&S layer and the application.  I must admit I am not surprised by the
> opposition to a ready made solution that preserves network layering while
> offering virtually every possible innovation.
[snip]

What is lost by throwing layering out the window?  Layering is an
artificial categorization of functions at best.  What technical
advantages are lost?

--brian

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock    ¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦
bidulock@openss7.org    ¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in  ¦
http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. ¦
                        ¦ Therefore  all  progress  depends on the ¦
                        ¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦