So perhaps we should have sent in some IPP specs as April fools specs -- the
joke being that they were real.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl" <email@example.com>
To: "McDonald, Ira" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 2:26 PM
Subject: RE: IPP> RFC 3251 - Electicity over IP
> In case you don't know, April 1 RFCs has the highest priority in the RFC
> editor's queue.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of McDonald,
> > Ira
> > Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 10:30 AM
> > To: 'firstname.lastname@example.org'
> > Subject: IPP> RFC 3251 - Electicity over IP
> > Hi folks,
> > I couldn't resist sending on this "light" reading:
> > RFC 3251 "Electricity over IP"
> > ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3251.txt
> > RFC 3252 "Binary Lexical Octet Ad-hoc Transport (BLOAT)"
> > ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3252.txt
> > Cheers,
> > - Ira McDonald
> > High North Inc
> > ------------------------------
> > [from RFC 3251]
> > Abstract
> > Mostly Pointless Lamp Switching (MPLampS) is an architecture for
> > carrying electricity over IP (with an MPLS control plane). According
> > to our marketing department, MPLampS has the potential to
> > dramatically lower the price, ease the distribution and usage, and
> > improve the manageability of delivering electricity. This document
> > is motivated by such work as SONET/SDH over IP/MPLS (with apologies
> > to the authors). Readers of the previous work have been observed
> > scratching their heads and muttering, "What next?". This document
> > answers that question.
> > This document has also been written as a public service. The "Sub-
> > IP" area has been formed to give equal opportunity to those working
> > on technologies outside of traditional IP networking to write
> > complicated IETF documents. There are possibly many who are
> > wondering how to exploit this opportunity and attain high visibility.
> > Towards this goal, we see the topics of "foo-over-MPLS" (or MPLS
> > control for random technologies) as highly amenable for producing a
> > countless number of unimplementable documents. This document
> > illustrates the key ingredients that go into producing any "foo-
> > over-MPLS" document and may be used as a template for all such work.
> > [from RFC 3252]
> > Abstract
> > This document defines a reformulation of IP and two transport layer
> > protocols (TCP and UDP) as XML applications.
> > 1. Introduction
> > 1.1. Overview
> > This document describes the Binary Lexical Octet Ad-hoc Transport
> > (BLOAT): a reformulation of a widely-deployed network-layer protocol
> > (IP [RFC791]), and two associated transport layer protocols (TCP
> > [RFC793] and UDP [RFC768]) as XML [XML] applications. It also
> > describes methods for transporting BLOAT over Ethernet and IEEE 802
> > networks as well as encapsulating BLOAT in IP for gatewaying BLOAT
> > across the public Internet.
> > 1.2. Motivation
> > The wild popularity of XML as a basis for application-level protocols
> > such as the Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol [RFC3080], the Simple
> > Object Access Protocol [SOAP], and Jabber [JABBER] prompted
> > investigation into the possibility of extending the use of XML in the
> > protocol stack. Using XML at both the transport and network layer in
> > addition to the application layer would provide for an amazing amount
> > of power and flexibility while removing dependencies on proprietary
> > and hard-to-understand binary protocols. This protocol unification
> > would also allow applications to use a single XML parser for all
> > aspects of their operation, eliminating developer time spent figuring
> > out the intricacies of each new protocol, and moving the hard work of
> > parsing to the XML toolset. The use of XML also mitigates concerns
> > over "network vs. host" byte ordering which is at the root of many
> > network application bugs.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 01 2002 - 17:52:25 EST