The need for smaller protocol specifications

Harald Tveit Alvestrand harald at
Mon Jun 9 22:50:10 CEST 2003

--On mandag, juni 09, 2003 12:27:55 -0700 Charlie Perkins 
<charliep at> wrote:

> Hello Harald,
> I agree with your statements, and I wonder if you see the value
> of my argument.

to put it this way - I see logic behind your argument, but can see your 
argument being used for conclusions that I wouldn't support....

> Do you think that protocol specifications today are (generally
> speaking) too complicated, about right, or not yet complicated
> enough?

protocols should be "as simple as possible, and no simpler"... hard to 

> Regarding "good for AT LEAST ONE THING", does it
> mean there has to be a killer app?  What about IPv6--?

no, I wouldn't place the bar that high.....

IPv6 is good for moving data that can be used to support a TCP session.
If there hadn't been a spec for using IPv6 to support TCP (and a spec for 
using IPv6 over Ethernet), I'd have said that the IPv6 protocol suite was 


More information about the Problem-statement mailing list