Excuse me just a little, but I would like to follow-up on the Bush-o-Gram with regard to Jim Fleming and others whom Randy would love to silence in this world. I have read some of Jim's posts on his ideas of StarGates, Galaxies and his idea of IPv8; and I'll be the first to admit that I haven't taken the time to visit Jim's WWW site and read his proposals and ideas. They do seem to be a radical departure from the current way the IP world is moving; but I can't say, because I have not actually read Jim's concepts in any detail, so it is impossible to express any technical or engineering opinion accuractly. But..... on the other hand ... Jim Fleming certainly has the right to dream and envision his ideas in hopes of discovering 'A Better Paradigm' for scalable global IP internetworking and to present those ideas in IETF WGs and in NANOG, because his proposals relate directly to IP internetworking and IP operations. \begin{soapbox} When we become a group of scientists and engineers who remain closed to new ideas, no matter how radical they seem today, we become of the same mindset of those we choose change when our ideas were 'new'. I applaud Jim for having the courage and conviction to express his ideas, however much we may disagree with them. I also give him credit for not resorting to personal attacks when he is flamed for advocating a somewhat 'revolutionary' approach. IMO, it does not matter if we are talking the US Bill of Rights, Internet Services, scientific theories, theological views, or ideas of ethics and family, people deserve our respect; and that includes those who present ideas and concepts that depart from what is considered socially acceptable. It took me 40 years of mistakes to realize that little gem of wisdom above and my life is much, much happier not carrying the baggage of others anger and frustration. Those whom wish to "|/dev/null" all ideas and opinions that differ from there own personal perspective only damage themselves in the long run. Those whom disagree with my ideas, either technical or otherwise, are free to disagree. Those whom do not wish to read my opinions or theories are welcome to discard them, and make yourself happy at the same time. But please, please do not associate your anger and frustration toward me with others and pull them into the low-road discussions. Jim's ideas are worthy of consideration, and I am the first to apologize for not taking the time to review them, no matter how radical the terms 'StarGate and Galaxy' seem. \en{soapbox} Better ideas on building the next frontier welcome! Or, as suggested, have we reached the end off all secular knowledge in 1996 ;-) Rhetorically Speaking... Now back to blasting the failure of the MAE-WEST RS, and all the *very interesting*, "I told you so"s and "at-a-boys". Best Regards, Tim PS: Note to Jim Fleming.... what was that URL of your ideas? I am inclined to read them now that we share the *heat* of the "Burning Bush" together :-)
On Sun, 26 May 1996, Tim Bass wrote:
Excuse me just a little, but I would like to follow-up on the Bush-o-Gram with regard to Jim Fleming and others whom Randy would love to silence in this world.
NANOG = North American Network Operators' Group Tim, please stop lowering this list's signal/noise ratio. This list is not for philophical treatise on anything. It's an operator's group. Discussion of IPv8, merits or lack there of, and such is better suited for lists like Big-internet, which is for non-operational side of things.
I have read some of Jim's posts on his ideas of StarGates, Galaxies and his idea of IPv8; and I'll be the first to admit that I haven't taken the time to visit Jim's WWW site and read his proposals and ideas. They do seem to be a radical
Then don't comment.
and in NANOG, because his proposals relate directly to IP internetworking and IP operations.
Wrong. As IPv8 currently stands, it has nothing to do with operations. Once Jim documents it in an I-D, solicits peer review, and get at least two interoperable implementations, then it would be of interest to NANOG. I'm sure toy junkies like me would love to spend some time playing with implementation of IPv8 once that happens. Until then, please keep whatifs, philosophical rants etc off NANOG. -dorian
Warning. This has nothing to do with network operations. Hit D now. I warned you. You don't want to read this. It's off topic in the worse way. Tim, you wrote:
Excuse me just a little, but I would like to follow-up on the Bush-o-Gram with regard to Jim Fleming and others whom Randy would love to silence in this world.
While on the one hand Randy and I have not always seen eye to eye and I am reluctant to be seen here as his apologist or defender, I want to set the record straight. Randy doesn't want to silence you. In fact, in the spirit of Patrick Henry, Randy would (and has) risk his career and reputation to defend the means by which you propagate your ideas. When you are looking for censorship, you will end up looking elsewhere than in Randy's record. Randy's post of his .mumblerc was meant to show that he does not read your articles. Last time I checked, he has that right. Posting his .mumblerc has at least two goals: (a) letting folks know why he might not respond to something you write some time, and (b) setting an example that others can follow should they become as disgusted with your material as he is. I don't kill your articles automagically; I'm still young enough and irrational enough that I take some pleasure out of killing them by hand. The fact that you can read what Randy wrote and somehow infer from it that he wants to silence you is a shining example of why we were all so sad that you didn't show up for your CIDRD slots at the LA IETF. On the other hand, with the whole room (minus Randy) lined up at the microphone to "ask questions" I don't know if we could have gotten through the agenda. I think you should LISTEN to the things folks say about you. Don't just look for ways to dispute, or reasons to ignore, accusations of technical ignorance or malevolent intent. LISTEN to the fact that they are made, and try to see if you can find the things in your behaviour which lead so many others to think that you are such a total loss. Paul
participants (3)
-
Dorian Kim
-
Paul A Vixie
-
Tim Bass