3 ms·

> Maybe the marketing department needs to hire someone who knows the fundamentals to write the headlines? What's that quote about throwing stones while living

> Maybe the marketing department needs to hire someone who knows the fundamentals to write the headlines? What's that quote about throwing stones while living in glass houses? The headline says nothing about replacing IP. It's talking about replacing "TCP/IP", which is neither "TCP or IP" nor "TCP and IP". In this case, it's asking whether TCP/IP will be replaced with a protocol (QUIC) that is built on UDP/IP. IP is definitely still involved. As with the classic XKCD reference for this situation (https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/), I find it very unlikely that it will "replace" TCP/IP in the sense of TCP/IP disappearing altogether, but it certainly stands a chance of replacing TCP/IP in many specific applications that test it and find it beneficial.

takeda 7y ago
TCP/IP != TCP TCP/IP is a name for the Internet Protocol Suite[1], which UDP ironically is part of. If someone talks about one protocol replacing another they should be aware of this distinction, and this title makes me believe the author doesn't know what he is talking about. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- coder543 7y ago
  That's not the singular definition of TCP/IP, as you're seemingly so intent on believing. TCP and IP are separable[1], so it logically makes sense to have "TCP/IP" mean that you're using them together, rather than meaning some arbitrary suite of protocols that may have nothing to do with TCP specifically. Cloudflare, which is obviously a major industry player, defines TCP/IP the same way that the webinar authors and I both normally define it.[2] Cloudflare also (logically) refers to UDP/IP as a concept,[3][4] which further supports the notion that TCP/IP is not singularly referring to the whole internet protocol suite. I understand that people do sometimes use TCP/IP to refer to the internet protocol suite as a whole, including UDP. I've seen it before. That doesn't make it the only (or most logical) definition of the term. It's certainly not the definition the authors of this webinar intended you to use when reading the title. In the tech world, many terms are overloaded with multiple definitions. This isn’t an uncommon situation by any means. > this title makes me believe the author doesn't know what he is talking about Because the authors are choosing to use a different common definition of TCP/IP, you think they're the ignorant ones because you don't know that common definition? Or because you're only willing to read the title in the way that makes it seem the most nonsensical? I left my first reply because the author of that comment was being so unnecessarily insulting to the authors, and now you're following up with similar snark, and posting it in multiple places on this topic, when there is no evidence to support that your use of the term is the only valid use of the term. [1]: https://superuser.com/questions/449703/must-tcp-use-ip https://superuser.com/questions/449703/must-tcp-use-ip [2]: https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/tcp-ip/ https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/tcp-ip/ [3]: https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/user-datagram-protocol-udp/ https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/user-datag... [4]: https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/internet-protocol/ https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/internet-p...
  - bawolff 7y ago
    I don't think your cloudflare link supports your position. CF talks about "The TCP/IP relationship..." - in context they are clearly referring to tcp and ip as two separate nouns, not as a single noun to refer to the internet suite. Context can modify word meaning-using that as an example really doesn't say anything about the term "tcp/ip" in general. Fwiw Wikipedia also thinks tcp/ip means the protocol suite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite (edit: i guess other person already said that, i didnt notice) Edit2: otoh, i think this whole argument is pedantic and its clear what the original article meant.
    - bregma 7y ago
      If it was clear, after reading the headline I would not have assumed that QUIC was proposed to replace the internet protocol (IP) for the internet. The title "QUIC -- Will it replace TCP?" would be accurate and correct and contains everything both necessary and sufficient to describe the article. Adding in unrelated extras, like QUIC replacing IP, conveys additional and incorrect information. It muddies what the article is about. Calling out unclear and misleading communications is not being pedantic. Clarity is the most fundamental aspect of good and effective communications. The headline writer does not need an apologist, they need to expand their knowledge of the subject they are writing about.
  - takeda 7y ago
    No, TCP/IP is just a name of the suite, there's no such thing as UDP/IP, just because person who wrote the cloudflare glossary invented it doesn't mean it is an accepted term. Frankly UDP over any other protocol than IP makes very little sense, UDP header literally are just 4 fields: - source port - destination port - length of the datagram - checksum that's it, and just ports by themselves are not really useful for anything. The name TCP/IP comes because TCP and IP protocols were created together and closely coupled. Soon they were separated and other protocols were added (UDP, ICMP, IGMP, ARP and many others), but the name stayed. The TCP/IP name stands for the protocol suite, and things like UDP/IP were invented by people who didn't understand its meaning. Here are definitions from ICANN: https://icannwiki.org/TCP/IP https://icannwiki.org/TCP/IP Many other authoritative places: Bunch of RFCs (this one is from 90s): https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1180 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1180 https://computerhistory.org/profile/vint-cerf/ https://computerhistory.org/profile/vint-cerf/ This term was used essentially from the beginning of the Internet: http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/tcpdigest_paper.txt http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/tcpdigest_paper.txt

takeda 7y ago

TCP/IP != TCP TCP/IP is a name for the Internet Protocol Suite[1], which UDP ironically is part of. If someone talks about one protocol replacing another they should be aware of this distinction, and this title makes me believe the author doesn't know what he is talking about. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
coder543 7y ago
That's not the singular definition of TCP/IP, as you're seemingly so intent on believing. TCP and IP are separable[1], so it logically makes sense to have "TCP/IP" mean that you're using them together, rather than meaning some arbitrary suite of protocols that may have nothing to do with TCP specifically. Cloudflare, which is obviously a major industry player, defines TCP/IP the same way that the webinar authors and I both normally define it.[2] Cloudflare also (logically) refers to UDP/IP as a concept,[3][4] which further supports the notion that TCP/IP is not singularly referring to the whole internet protocol suite. I understand that people do sometimes use TCP/IP to refer to the internet protocol suite as a whole, including UDP. I've seen it before. That doesn't make it the only (or most logical) definition of the term. It's certainly not the definition the authors of this webinar intended you to use when reading the title. In the tech world, many terms are overloaded with multiple definitions. This isn’t an uncommon situation by any means. > this title makes me believe the author doesn't know what he is talking about Because the authors are choosing to use a different common definition of TCP/IP, you think they're the ignorant ones because you don't know that common definition? Or because you're only willing to read the title in the way that makes it seem the most nonsensical? I left my first reply because the author of that comment was being so unnecessarily insulting to the authors, and now you're following up with similar snark, and posting it in multiple places on this topic, when there is no evidence to support that your use of the term is the only valid use of the term. [1]: https://superuser.com/questions/449703/must-tcp-use-ip https://superuser.com/questions/449703/must-tcp-use-ip [2]: https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/tcp-ip/ https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/tcp-ip/ [3]: https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/user-datagram-protocol-udp/ https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/user-datag... [4]: https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/internet-protocol/ https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/internet-p...
- bawolff 7y ago
  I don't think your cloudflare link supports your position. CF talks about "The TCP/IP relationship..." - in context they are clearly referring to tcp and ip as two separate nouns, not as a single noun to refer to the internet suite. Context can modify word meaning-using that as an example really doesn't say anything about the term "tcp/ip" in general. Fwiw Wikipedia also thinks tcp/ip means the protocol suite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite (edit: i guess other person already said that, i didnt notice) Edit2: otoh, i think this whole argument is pedantic and its clear what the original article meant.
  - bregma 7y ago
    If it was clear, after reading the headline I would not have assumed that QUIC was proposed to replace the internet protocol (IP) for the internet. The title "QUIC -- Will it replace TCP?" would be accurate and correct and contains everything both necessary and sufficient to describe the article. Adding in unrelated extras, like QUIC replacing IP, conveys additional and incorrect information. It muddies what the article is about. Calling out unclear and misleading communications is not being pedantic. Clarity is the most fundamental aspect of good and effective communications. The headline writer does not need an apologist, they need to expand their knowledge of the subject they are writing about.
- takeda 7y ago
  No, TCP/IP is just a name of the suite, there's no such thing as UDP/IP, just because person who wrote the cloudflare glossary invented it doesn't mean it is an accepted term. Frankly UDP over any other protocol than IP makes very little sense, UDP header literally are just 4 fields: - source port - destination port - length of the datagram - checksum that's it, and just ports by themselves are not really useful for anything. The name TCP/IP comes because TCP and IP protocols were created together and closely coupled. Soon they were separated and other protocols were added (UDP, ICMP, IGMP, ARP and many others), but the name stayed. The TCP/IP name stands for the protocol suite, and things like UDP/IP were invented by people who didn't understand its meaning. Here are definitions from ICANN: https://icannwiki.org/TCP/IP https://icannwiki.org/TCP/IP Many other authoritative places: Bunch of RFCs (this one is from 90s): https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1180 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1180 https://computerhistory.org/profile/vint-cerf/ https://computerhistory.org/profile/vint-cerf/ This term was used essentially from the beginning of the Internet: http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/tcpdigest_paper.txt http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/tcpdigest_paper.txt