5 ms·
The Twelve Networking Truths (1996)
- mitchbob 4y ago(1996)
- whitexn--g28h 4y agoSee rule 11.
- drunkenmagician 4y agoStill applicable today, equally so to broader layers of (cloud) infrastructure.
- YouWhy 4y agoWow, a blast from the past! I first stumbled on these some time in the early 2000s. During my stint in Big Tech, I would often times reflect how much of what I was seeing was an instance of: > With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine.
- euroderf 4y agoSee: F-4 Phantom
- tbrownaw 4y agoYou cannot act on information you do not have. Applies to both people debugging things, and networked systems answering requests.
- booboofixer 4y agoWonder if there’s a good RFC in store for us this April 1st
- teddyh 4y agoA more canonical URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1925 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1925
- teddyh 4y agoRelated: Fallacies of distributed computing <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacies_of_distributed_computing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacies_of_distributed_compu...>
- tbrownaw 4y agoThe first rule of network transparency is: the network is not transparent.
- netfortius 4y agoThis has been in my sig for ever, in all public profiles. The "truths" apply for way more than just networking.
- bayindirh 4y agoYeah, it was shivering to see things we discuss over and over is being discussed over and over since 1996, at least. I may start to add this to my e-mail signature, too.
- throwawaylinux 4y agoIt's funny to see something like this in a professional body now. Today, this kind of thing is PR'ed, HR'ed, and managed out. Like jokes and swear words and things in code comments. You can understand why, light-hearted fun is not necessary so its risk/reward is strictly negative. Still makes me a bit nostalgic for a time in computing that I never experienced, like the old usenet group archives (I was alive and using computers in some capacity at that time, just not working in the industry).
- nicholasbraker 4y agoA classic and applicable to more than networking alone..
- iso1631 4y ago> Good, Fast, Cheap: Pick any two (you can't have all three). Far too many people believe that if you have something that's not two of these that the third follows, specifically if you have Not-Fast and Not-Cheap it follows it must therefore be Good. It's quite possible to be Bad, Slow, Expensive. Indeed it's often likely to be that. There's also a belief that you can't have three of # Good enough, Fast enough, Cheap enough: Pick any two (you can't have all three). With more time and more money you can usually make things better, but you can also make things worse. The question in business is does it meet the need. Does doubling the budget also double the business value. Fundamentally I dislike this absolute, and indeed the next claim > It is more complicated than you think. Is bang on
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]