[HN Gopher] The Decommoditization of Protocols (1998)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Decommoditization of Protocols (1998)
        
       Author : marttt
       Score  : 66 points
       Date   : 2022-08-14 15:26 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.levien.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.levien.com)
        
       | raphlinus wrote:
       | I have no idea why this popped up now. Overall I think it holds
       | up reasonably well, though it's in a brasher and younger voice
       | than I would use today. I went back and fixed the link rot.
       | 
       | (Incidentally, the process of updating web pages on levien.com is
       | to log in to my Linode instance and use vim to edit the static
       | directory. I probably should upgrade to some more modern way, at
       | least use version control, but I do get a warm sense of nostalgia
       | doing it this way.)
        
       | sackerhews wrote:
       | In the spirit of the Halloween documents, Microsoft implemented
       | and extended the Kerberos protocol.
       | 
       | Extended it just a tiny bit enough to be incompatible with
       | everyone else. After getting bad PR in the media, they
       | reluctantly agreed to publish their changes. And guess what?
       | 
       |  _... in order to get it, you have to run a Windows .exe file
       | which forces you agree to a click-through license agreement where
       | you agree to treat it as a trade secret, before it will give you
       | the .pdf file_
       | 
       | See https://slashdot.org/story/00/05/02/158204/kerberos-pacs-
       | and...
        
       | duckhelmet wrote:
       | 'One of the most interesting things about Microsoft's Halloween
       | Memo is the concept of "de-commoditizing" protocols'
       | 
       | Don't they mean monopolizing the protocols /s
        
         | gryn wrote:
         | that's the end goal, de-comoditization is the means to that
         | goal.
        
       | ciroduran wrote:
       | I appreciate the praise that TCP/IP gets in this post:
       | 
       | " TCP/IP is the foundation of the Internet. The protocol dates
       | back to the early days of the ARPANet, and has existed in its
       | present form since September 1981 (the date of RFC 791 and RFC
       | 793). This protocol violates all of the first five principles of
       | de-commoditization.                   It is simple. Together, the
       | two RFCs span 130 simply formatted pages, appendices and all.
       | This is nothing short of astonishing, considering how difficult a
       | problem internetworking is considered to be.         It is
       | completely specified. IETF protocols in general are well known
       | for specifying "bits on the wire", and these protocols exemplify
       | IETF practice. There are no complicated options or variants. As a
       | consequence, TCP/IP implementations tend to work together very
       | well. (actually, you need to add a link layer to get a complete
       | TCP/IP implementation. However, RFC 1055 describes such a link
       | layer (SLIP) in six pages.         It is well documented. The
       | RFCs are a model of clarity, thanks in large part to Jon Postel.
       | It is stable and mature. The protocol has been in use since 1981,
       | and has scaled by many orders of magnitude. Old implementations
       | still work on the modern Internet.         It is unencumbered. No
       | patents, copyrights, nor trademarks are infringed by a working
       | TCP/IP implementation.
       | 
       | To say that TCP/IP has been enormously successful would be an
       | understatement."
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-08-14 23:00 UTC)