Thread View: de.admin.misc
5 messages
5 total messages
Started by pell
Tue, 18 Aug 1992 09:58
IP connections and Germany
Author: pell
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 09:58
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 09:58
76 lines
4145 bytes
4145 bytes
First, excuse my English but my German is too rusty.
I wonder if it might be time to question the future of the Internet
(TCP/IP) in Germany. It's not my purpose to tell anyone how to do
things, but my fear is that not everybody is aware of what's going on.
Maybe it's not too late for those who want IP to do something.
This is a (rough) translation of a mail I sent the other day to the
IP-net coordinators in Sweden, and a reply from one of them (I haven't
secured explicit permission to post, so I withhold the name for the moment).
>> From: pell@lysator.liu.se (P{r Emanuelsson)
>> Subject: routing to germany
>>
>> Hi! Since about one week back, the routing to (certain computers(?) in)
>> Germany has been over the UK, instead of the usual Amsterdam, with severe
>> performance degradation.
>>
>>traceroute to 137.248.1.1 (137.248.1.1), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
>> 1 lysator.liu.se (130.236.254.1) 0 ms 20 ms 0 ms
>> 2 rainier.isy.liu.se (130.236.23.1) 0 ms 0 ms 20 ms
>> 3 isy.liu.se (130.236.20.1) 0 ms 20 ms 20 ms
>> 4 ipliu-gw.liu.se (130.236.1.1) 20 ms 20 ms 0 ms
>> 5 sunet-gw.sunet.se (130.244.9.17) 60 ms 20 ms 0 ms
>> 6 Stockholm-EBS2.nordu.net (192.36.148.20) 20 ms 20 ms 20 ms
>> 7 Stockholm-EBS1.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.17) 40 ms 40 ms 40 ms
>> 8 Stockholm-EBS5.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.34) 100 ms 180 ms 80 ms
>> 9 London-Stockholm.Ebone.NET (192.121.155.17) 200 ms 220 ms 220 ms
>>10 int-gw.ulcc.ac.uk (128.86.1.2) 180 ms 160 ms 100 ms
>>11 188.1.236.124 (188.1.236.124) 2440 ms 1740 ms 2120 ms
>>12 * 188.1.132.108 (188.1.132.108) 9440 ms *
>>13 convex.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE (137.248.1.1) 7260 ms * 4280 ms
>>
>> Should it work like this?
>
>It works GREAT, according to German norms. IP doesn't exist; OSI and
>X25 do.
>
>In this case you are a victim of X25.
>
>And, yes, it should work like this according to a decision by Germany (DFN).
>Count on it becoming even worse, since "Europe" is moving to something called
>"IXI production service" instead of setting up a working network, as decided
>by the EC!
>
>Germany, where they call us dealing with IP for "die Banditen", doesn't
>want to be a part of Ebone, but they want to talk (X25) with their buddies
>in England.
>
>There's almost no way into Germany anymore (for public use), except routing
>over the US, but that doesn't help much since the problems are in the
>German "SUNET". [SUNET is the Swedish University network - Pell's comm.]
>
>The only thing we can do anything about is what's called Ebone in your
>tracing, but that seems to work fine.
>
>Ask the people you have contact with in Germany to complain if they want it
>different. I think we have done all we can from here.
As an aside, the Nordic countries early understood the importance of
networking and has never had any performance problems due to continuous
upgrading when usage so dictates. I think our NORDUnet backbone is
currently 2 Mbit/s, with a line to the US of 768 kbit and 1 (2?) lines to
Amsterdam of 256 kbit, for example. There is a commercial, very successful,
IP provider (SWIPnet) offering different levels of service for small,
medium and large companies. They have forced the Swedish PTT (Televerket)
to offer their own IP service, but they have some ridiculous ideas that you
should encapsulate your IP packets in X25 coffins before transmitting them,
besides being more expensive than SWIPnet. I haven't heard of anyone using
their "service".
A slightly paraphrased quote from The Tao of programming comes to mind:
The only realm where politics rules technical decisions is in the mind of
the unenlightened.
/Pell
Re: IP connections and Germany
Author: Oliver Schoett
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 14:21
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 14:21
48 lines
3133 bytes
3133 bytes
In article <1992Aug18.082075.pell@lysator.liu.se> pell@lysator.liu.se writes:
> I wonder if it might be time to question the future of the Internet
> (TCP/IP) in Germany. It's not my purpose to tell anyone how to do
> things, but my fear is that not everybody is aware of what's going on.
> Maybe it's not too late for those who want IP to do something.
[...]
> >> Hi! Since about one week back, the routing to (certain computers(?) in)
> >> Germany has been over the UK, instead of the usual Amsterdam, with severe
> >> performance degradation.
I noticed an even crazier routing last night: from Munich to France
over London - Stockholm - Amsterdam!
[lida] traceroute -m 20 -w 40 cnam.cnam.fr
traceroute to cnam.cnam.fr (192.33.159.6), 20 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 * * *
2 bro4cz.lrz-muenchen.de (129.187.220.254) 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms
3 bro1c1.lrz-muenchen.de (129.187.10.251) 16 ms 10 ms 10 ms
4 dfnbigate_s2.GMD.DE (188.1.236.124) 12255 ms 7205 ms 11573 ms
5 int-gw.ulcc.ac.uk (192.16.192.185) 13256 ms 15098 ms 8323 ms
6 London-EBS1.Ebone.NET (128.86.1.6) 14269 ms * 7120 ms
7 Stockholm-London.Ebone.NET (192.121.155.18) 12593 ms 8802 ms 11991 ms
8 Stockholm-EBS1.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.33) 5711 ms 4533 ms 5486 ms
9 Stockholm-EBS2.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.18) 10077 ms 13970 ms *
10 * Stockholm-EBS4.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.50) 12680 ms 13180 ms
11 Amsterdam.NL.EU.net (192.87.4.20) 9131 ms 6456 ms 7259 ms
12 Paris.FR.EU.NET (134.222.2.2) 6293 ms * 18449 ms
13 fnet-gw.inria.fr (192.93.1.108) 11685 ms * 22512 ms
14 cisco.cnam.fr (192.70.71.6) 16838 ms 14640 ms 21646 ms
15 * * cnam.cnam.fr (192.33.159.6) 11884 ms
Note also the abysmal packet running times, apparently caused by
dfnbigate_s2.GMD.DE (this was at 9 p.m., hardly rush hour on the net).
I was in Swansea (UK) for the last six months -- the typical ping time
from there to the US was 0.4 - 0.5 s, to Munich 5 - 10 s. Telnet to
Munich meant waiting minutes between commands.
With this sort of performance, the Internet into and out of Germany
becomes nearly unusable. Is there any chance of improvement?
Oliver Schoett Inst. f. Informatik (H2), Technische Univ. M"unchen
Postfach 20 24 20, 8000 M"unchen 2, Germany
schoett@informatik.tu-muenchen.de phone +49 89 2105-2399 fax -8207
Re: IP connections and Germany
Author: Dirk Husemann
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 10:50
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 10:50
85 lines
4579 bytes
4579 bytes
schoett@informatik.tu-muenchen.de (Oliver Schoett) writes: >In article <1992Aug18.082075.pell@lysator.liu.se> pell@lysator.liu.se writes: > > I wonder if it might be time to question the future of the Internet > > (TCP/IP) in Germany. It's not my purpose to tell anyone how to do > > things, but my fear is that not everybody is aware of what's going on. > > Maybe it's not too late for those who want IP to do something. >[...] > > >> Hi! Since about one week back, the routing to (certain computers(?) in) > > >> Germany has been over the UK, instead of the usual Amsterdam, with severe > > >> performance degradation. >I noticed an even crazier routing last night: from Munich to France >over London - Stockholm - Amsterdam! > [lida] traceroute -m 20 -w 40 cnam.cnam.fr > traceroute to cnam.cnam.fr (192.33.159.6), 20 hops max, 40 byte packets > 1 * * * > 2 bro4cz.lrz-muenchen.de (129.187.220.254) 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms > 3 bro1c1.lrz-muenchen.de (129.187.10.251) 16 ms 10 ms 10 ms > 4 dfnbigate_s2.GMD.DE (188.1.236.124) 12255 ms 7205 ms 11573 ms > 5 int-gw.ulcc.ac.uk (192.16.192.185) 13256 ms 15098 ms 8323 ms > 6 London-EBS1.Ebone.NET (128.86.1.6) 14269 ms * 7120 ms > 7 Stockholm-London.Ebone.NET (192.121.155.18) 12593 ms 8802 ms 11991 ms > 8 Stockholm-EBS1.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.33) 5711 ms 4533 ms 5486 ms > 9 Stockholm-EBS2.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.18) 10077 ms 13970 ms * > 10 * Stockholm-EBS4.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.50) 12680 ms 13180 ms > 11 Amsterdam.NL.EU.net (192.87.4.20) 9131 ms 6456 ms 7259 ms > 12 Paris.FR.EU.NET (134.222.2.2) 6293 ms * 18449 ms > 13 fnet-gw.inria.fr (192.93.1.108) 11685 ms * 22512 ms > 14 cisco.cnam.fr (192.70.71.6) 16838 ms 14640 ms 21646 ms > 15 * * cnam.cnam.fr (192.33.159.6) 11884 ms >Note also the abysmal packet running times, apparently caused by >dfnbigate_s2.GMD.DE (this was at 9 p.m., hardly rush hour on the net). >I was in Swansea (UK) for the last six months -- the typical ping time >from there to the US was 0.4 - 0.5 s, to Munich 5 - 10 s. Telnet to >Munich meant waiting minutes between commands. >With this sort of performance, the Internet into and out of Germany >becomes nearly unusable. Is there any chance of improvement? I cannot speak for neither the DFN nor the GMD doing the actual service of providing IP/X.25. I think a couple of circumstances happened to coincide here: (1) The GMD (dfnbigate_s2) has been experiencing severe line problems with their X.25 point-of-attachment. The German Telekom seems to be busy trying to fix that situation. (Basically they suffer from a huge amount of CRC errors on that line). (2) The DFN-IP (what all the people complaining so far have been using) is using a new line between Germany and the UK. This line will be run at 2 Mbit/s in the next future. The UK seems to have a >= 512 Kbit/s line to Stockholm. Thus the net effect will be better connectivity. I think what currently constitutes the main problem is (1). Also, have any of you ever experienced IP connectivity to European sites via the EUnet (speaking of connectivity is in itself kind of an overstatement)? 5-10 secs round trip times are the average (from within the German WIN --- the German Research Network). Bashing the DFN-IP service w/o trying to find out why things go wrong/don't work that well is IMHO not exactly what one would consider fair, right? A call to your network administrator could have reveiled that (the GMD people did post a mail to the sites that use DFN-IP telling about the CRC problems). Dirk Dirk Husemann Tel.: +49 9131 85 8029 University of Erlangen-Nuremberg FAX: +49 9131 39388 Department of Computer Science IV Martenstrasse 1 D-W 8520 Erlangen, Germany Dirk.Husemann@informatik.uni-erlangen.de /C=de/A=dbp/P=uni-erlangen/OU=informatik/S=husemann/G=dirk/ ---
Re: IP connections and Germany
Author: Peter Merdian
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 11:49
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 11:49
38 lines
2524 bytes
2524 bytes
In article <1992Aug18.082075.pell@lysator.liu.se> pell@lysator.liu.se writes: >>> >>>traceroute to 137.248.1.1 (137.248.1.1), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets >>> 1 lysator.liu.se (130.236.254.1) 0 ms 20 ms 0 ms >>> 2 rainier.isy.liu.se (130.236.23.1) 0 ms 0 ms 20 ms >>> 3 isy.liu.se (130.236.20.1) 0 ms 20 ms 20 ms >>> 4 ipliu-gw.liu.se (130.236.1.1) 20 ms 20 ms 0 ms >>> 5 sunet-gw.sunet.se (130.244.9.17) 60 ms 20 ms 0 ms >>> 6 Stockholm-EBS2.nordu.net (192.36.148.20) 20 ms 20 ms 20 ms >>> 7 Stockholm-EBS1.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.17) 40 ms 40 ms 40 ms >>> 8 Stockholm-EBS5.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.34) 100 ms 180 ms 80 ms >>> 9 London-Stockholm.Ebone.NET (192.121.155.17) 200 ms 220 ms 220 ms >>>10 int-gw.ulcc.ac.uk (128.86.1.2) 180 ms 160 ms 100 ms >>>11 188.1.236.124 (188.1.236.124) 2440 ms 1740 ms 2120 ms >>>12 * 188.1.132.108 (188.1.132.108) 9440 ms * >>>13 convex.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE (137.248.1.1) 7260 ms * 4280 ms >>> Pell, the problem is not a slow link between Great Britain and Germany, (and not a matter of EBONE vs. IXI) but a overcrowded line inside Germany. If I want to reach Marburg from Stuttgart, it is even worse: traceroute 137.248.1.1 traceroute to convex.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE (137.248.1.1) 30 hops max, 40byte packets 1 cisco1.rus.uni-stuttgart.de (129.69.1.10) 5 ms 27 ms 5 ms 2 BelWue-GW.Uni-Stuttgart.DE. (129.69.8.110) 4 ms 4 ms 4 ms 3 Stuttgart1.BelWue.DE (129.143.70.1) 5 ms 6 ms 8 ms 4 cisco01.Uni-Marburg.DE (188.1.132.108) 8767 ms 9689 ms 12212 ms 5 convex.HRZ.Uni-Marburg.DE (137.248.1.1) 15145 ms 13537 ms 12514 ms So the solution is to upgrade the slow intra german links from 9.6 and 64 KBit/sec to 2 MBit/sec which is done by some IP sites, but its really a matter of money (350 000 DM which is about 175 000 Ecu a year). -- Peter Peter Merdian, BelWue Coordination, merdian@rus.uni-stuttgart.dbp.de
Re: IP connections and Germany
Author: Dirk Husemann
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 09:14
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 09:14
239 lines
13352 bytes
13352 bytes
dave@ecrc.de (Dave Morton) writes: >In article <Bt88s8.Cov@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>, husemann@camelot.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Dirk Husemann) writes: >> schoett@informatik.tu-muenchen.de (Oliver Schoett) writes: >> >> >In article <1992Aug18.082075.pell@lysator.liu.se> pell@lysator.liu.se writes: >> >> > > I wonder if it might be time to question the future of the Internet >> > > (TCP/IP) in Germany. It's not my purpose to tell anyone how to do >> > > things, but my fear is that not everybody is aware of what's going on. >> > > Maybe it's not too late for those who want IP to do something. >> >The time has long passed. We (ECRC) did something about a year ago, we have >our own line to Dortmund and we'll shortly have a direct one to Amsterdam >as well. Fine. Just out of curiosity --- How much do the lines to Dortmund/Amsterdam cost you and what capacities are available on that lines? Also, does the ECRC have the need to connect to German sites at all? I.e. do you have a larger amount of international (EC & US & et al.) traffic than German? >Basically we got sick and tired of X.25 and the lack of European >connectivity from Germany. Except for EUnet I do not know of other service >providers here providing good connectivity to the rest of Europe. Yeah, sure, switching your own line to EUnet will probably give some kind of reasonable connectivity --- but that's a little of the mark, as that requires *money* for own lines. Service --- as pointed out by other posters --- via the EUnet to European sites --- frankly --- sucks. Yes, I'm aware that this is due to an overloaded WIN point-of-attachment, still it sucks from *my* point of view as a customer of EUnet (we are doing --- for historical reasons our European traffic with EUnet and the rest with DFN-IP). >Having said that - yes - many, many people in Germany are aware of the >problem and are attempting to do something about it, let's wish them success. I heard rumors that things will probably change to the better, let's hope things will proceed as necessary. >> >I noticed an even crazier routing last night: from Munich to France >> >over London - Stockholm - Amsterdam! >> >> > [lida] traceroute -m 20 -w 40 cnam.cnam.fr >> > traceroute to cnam.cnam.fr (192.33.159.6), 20 hops max, 40 byte packets >> > 1 * * * >> > 2 bro4cz.lrz-muenchen.de (129.187.220.254) 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms >> > 3 bro1c1.lrz-muenchen.de (129.187.10.251) 16 ms 10 ms 10 ms >> > 4 dfnbigate_s2.GMD.DE (188.1.236.124) 12255 ms 7205 ms 11573 ms >> > 5 int-gw.ulcc.ac.uk (192.16.192.185) 13256 ms 15098 ms 8323 ms >> > 6 London-EBS1.Ebone.NET (128.86.1.6) 14269 ms * 7120 ms >> > 7 Stockholm-London.Ebone.NET (192.121.155.18) 12593 ms 8802 ms 11991 ms >> > 8 Stockholm-EBS1.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.33) 5711 ms 4533 ms 5486 ms >> > 9 Stockholm-EBS2.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.18) 10077 ms 13970 ms * >> > 10 * Stockholm-EBS4.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.50) 12680 ms 13180 ms >> > 11 Amsterdam.NL.EU.net (192.87.4.20) 9131 ms 6456 ms 7259 ms >> > 12 Paris.FR.EU.NET (134.222.2.2) 6293 ms * 18449 ms >> > 13 fnet-gw.inria.fr (192.93.1.108) 11685 ms * 22512 ms >> > 14 cisco.cnam.fr (192.70.71.6) 16838 ms 14640 ms 21646 ms >> > 15 * * cnam.cnam.fr (192.33.159.6) 11884 ms >> >This is perfectly normal, as seen from a DFN/WiN customers site, >and it is part of the current EBONE routing setup. Note IXI is being used >between Germany and the UK *before* traffic enters EBONE. >If I, from Munich do the same trace I get: >ecrc# traceroute -m 20 -w 40 cnam.cnam.fr >traceroute to cnam.cnam.fr (192.33.159.6), 20 hops max, 40 byte packets > 1 Munich.DE.EU.net (141.1.1.2) 6 ms 5 ms 5 ms > 2 Dortmund.DE.EU.net (139.4.4.1) 42 ms 38 ms 47 ms > 3 Amsterdam.NL.EU.NET (134.222.1.1) 1046 ms 671 ms 751 ms > 4 Paris.FR.EU.NET (134.222.2.2) 1443 ms 798 ms 1079 ms > 5 fnet-gw.inria.fr (192.93.1.108) 1229 ms 2729 ms * > 6 cisco.cnam.fr (192.70.71.6) 2349 ms 1762 ms 1240 ms > 7 cnam.cnam.fr (192.33.159.6) 1600 ms * 1227 ms >and this I did a few minutes ago, 15:10, not exactly the best >time of the day...... Even taking into account an overloaded >Dortmund - Amsterdam line, this is pretty good compared to the >above........ Come on, this is not exactly fair comparision, right? You read my posting --- at least you included my followup to the above --- and should know that the GMD (dfnbigate_s2) does/did suffer from severe CRC error on their X.25 p-o-a. Comparing a line that's used exclusively by the ECRC (and presumably in good shape) with a faulty one (knowing that it is faulty) is kind of preposterous, IMHO that is. > >> I cannot speak for neither the DFN nor the GMD doing the actual service of >> providing IP/X.25. I think a couple of circumstances happened to coincide here: >Neither can I nor do I wish to do so. >> >> (1) The GMD (dfnbigate_s2) has been experiencing severe line >> problems with their X.25 point-of-attachment. The German >> Telekom seems to be busy trying to fix that situation. >> (Basically they suffer from a huge amount of CRC errors on >> that line). >> >> (2) The DFN-IP (what all the people complaining so far have been >> using) is using a new line between Germany and the UK. This >> line will be run at 2 Mbit/s in the next future. The UK seems >> to have a >= 512 Kbit/s line to Stockholm. Thus the net >> effect will be better connectivity. >The "new line" is IXI - nothing more, nothing less and IXI as a pilot >has been around for a while, nothing new here. Also IXI was really >overloaded at the access point in Amsterdam the last time I looked. >The JANET line to Stockholm is only 256, not 512, and it's part of the >EBONE core. The so-called 2 Mbit/s line from Germany to London that you >mention is IXI production service, i.e. again X.25 and I have not seen any firm >dates for it's going into operation. Besides, even if it did go into >operation tomorrow morning, the COSINE figures I have seen indicate >16% X.25 throughtput in the first instance for 128 octet packets, not exactly >overwhelming. Resulting in a capacity of ~ 330 KBit/s (maximum, admittedly) --- not too bad. What kind of a line does the EUnet entertain? 128 Kbit/s? >From my WiN connection I basically gave up even trying to connect to >the rest of the world. Pity I missed the date to cancel the connection, >for us it has proven almost useless, still there's always next year..... ``Useless'' because you have no communication needs within Germany (i.e. no IP sites to do business with)? 8=) In that case ... I mean it's easy to bash the WIN if you're not in need of connecting to any German site (IP, X.25 or otherwise) ... >As I see it the WiN is the problem, that why you're seeing the lousy times >above. Again, watch these figures over our line from Munich to Newcastle Uni. >Note JANET is also and X.25 network......if you see what I'm getting at..... I can imagine where you would like to get to, yet, the JANET does have a different structure, different equipment (which has been shown to run X.25 at speeds of 2 Mbit/s and more even under load *and* in real life situtations --- the computing center people here did it, too) and a different environment: British Telecom does offer lines at far lowere prices than German Telekom does. The people of the WIN department at the German Telekom need to rent the lines themselves from the department of the German Telekom that's doing in lines. Apparently even those prices inside German Telekom are pretty stiff (don't ask me why, I really don't know). JANET can --- also --- rent lines that run thru property of privately owned utilities companies (British Rail [yeah, I know, not currently privately owned, but it seems to have an equivalent status], electricity companies, water works, etc) which it seems difficult to do in Germany. Sigh, before the CRC problems at the GMD we had pretty good RTTs and throughput (matching if not exceeding your examples) ... >ecrc# traceroute cragsted.ncl.ac.uk >traceroute to cragsted.ncl.ac.uk (128.240.2.80), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets > 1 Munich.DE.EU.net (141.1.1.2) 6 ms 5 ms 5 ms > 2 Dortmund.DE.EU.net (139.4.4.1) 37 ms 37 ms 37 ms > 3 Amsterdam.NL.EU.NET (134.222.1.1) 930 ms 1268 ms 369 ms > 4 Stockholm-EBS4.Ebone.NET (192.87.4.22) 427 ms 359 ms 108 ms > 5 Stockholm-EBS2.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.49) 359 ms 440 ms 208 ms > 6 Stockholm-EBS1.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.17) 259 ms 675 ms 494 ms > 7 * Stockholm-EBS5.Ebone.NET (192.121.154.34) 458 ms 302 ms > 8 London-Stockholm.Ebone.NET (192.121.155.17) 337 ms 536 ms 435 ms > 9 jips-gw.ulcc.ac.uk (128.86.1.4) 459 ms 688 ms 575 ms >10 gw.ed.JA.NET (146.97.112.7) 755 ms 856 ms 649 ms >11 gw.ncl.JA.NET (146.97.224.10) 985 ms 596 ms 821 ms >12 128.240.2.80 (128.240.2.80) 782 ms 493 ms 740 ms >ecrc# >This is at 15:20. I can live with this..... > >> Bashing the DFN-IP service w/o trying to find out why things go wrong/don't >> work that well is IMHO not exactly what one would consider fair, right? A call >> to your network administrator could have reveiled that (the GMD people did >> post a mail to the sites that use DFN-IP telling about the CRC problems). >> >> Dirk >Your right Dirk, and I'm quite sure GMD cannot be in any way held responsible >for the existing problems. I can very well imagine that they are probably >as disgusted as everyone else in Germany, but what can they do...... >The only way to get anything done is beat up DFN at the Mitgliederversammlung. >The only way this will happen is if everyone actually running the service >at the sites beat up their DFN representatives, and I'd guess knowing the >way things work in Germany this will not happen in my lifetime. What a pity >and a waste of energy, talent and money when things could be so different. Just beating them up won't help. Quite the contrary, I fear. I think there have always been two alternatives: (a) Try to improve the current situation, accepting the frameworks, the current set of rules --- a couple of people are doing that right now. One possibility might --- just hypothetically spoken --- be to get rid of equipment and a layout that has been proven to be corrupt/unsuited to the task --- without condeming the technology used. I think we should bear in mind that the real world is not always as objectively thinking and decision-making as we assume/wish/ think it is. There are people out there making decision about networking in Germany (and to a certain extent --- in Europe) which we all know are in favor of a certain technology. Now if you start bashing them (which quite a lot of people have done for quite some time) and tell them that it is all ``bullshit'' what they are doing/thinking you're not going to raise a lot of sympathy for your own concerns and ideas, right? If one keeps insisting on the ``bullshit'' attitude that's sure to create a we-and-they situation, each party regarding the other as not quite sane in their heads and in dire need of a sanity check. (b) Try to change the frameworks, the current set of rules. Also, a couple of people are trying to do that. This of course involves a lot of talking, a *lot* of patience, the ability to suffer set backs (and possibly quite a lot of them) --- and to act diplomatically, as you want to convince people that what they have been thinking/doing is not quite what you think it is. If at the same time part of your party is becoming inpatient and tries to push forward too fast you end up with the aforementioned we-and-they attitude (see above). I'm seeing progress with the (a) method, while (b) already has resulted in the mentioned we-and-they attitude (making life more difficult for the (a)-people). I can see progress with respect to other projects where (b) is better suited than (a) --- take 386BSD for example. Oh well, this sure is an area for ``religious wars'', isn't it? I hope I've not offended someone out there, Regards, Dirk Dirk Husemann Tel.: +49 9131 85 8029 University of Erlangen-Nuremberg FAX: +49 9131 39388 Department of Computer Science IV Martenstrasse 1 D-W 8520 Erlangen, Germany Dirk.Husemann@informatik.uni-erlangen.de /C=de/A=dbp/P=uni-erlangen/OU=informatik/S=husemann/G=dirk/ ---
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads