[Info-vax] Rethinking DECNET ?

[johnwallace4 at yahoo.co.uk]

On Saturday, 6 September 2014 19:41:01 UTC+1, Johnny Billquist  wrote:
[snipped again for brevity]

"OSI interoperability was definitely not proven at the point in time
when it was relevant. "

It had proved itself well enough for the big organisations that had
already seen the inevitable upper-layer issues to want vendors to show
a commitment to OSI. Y'know, Boeing, GM, governments, that kind of
folk. Folk with serious integration issues knew serious effort was
needed to fix them. 

The amateurs mostly didn't even understand the problem let alone the
answer. Or maybe they didn't like the implications of the scalability
and upper layer solutions. Kicking the problem down the road worked,
for a while at least. 

But eventually reality catches up, and some of the bigger players
have recently realised (or re-realised) that a co-ordinated answer
to the upper layer problems (as well as lower layer ones) is
necessary, hence Named Data Networking, and this week's announcement.
http://named-data.net/
though the concept behind this 'new' idea goes back at least to 2010:
https://www.parc.com/publication/2709/named-data-networking-ndn-project.html
"The Internet architecture is no longer a good match to its primary use,
so how do we design a new architecture that addresses today's problems
and will take us into the future with even greater success than the past?"

Oh hang on, we covered that here already a few hours ago.

Well some folks out there did the upper (and scalable lower) layer
architectures thing a few decades ago, so what's a few hours :)

Enough already.