[ih] fragmentation (Re: Could it have been different? [was Re: vm vs. memory])

[Paul Vixie]

Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 10/27/2017 5:08 AM, Paul Vixie wrote:
>> so i think we can tell that not only the actual "internet engineers" of
>> the world, but also their chosen vehicle, were in no way constrained by
>> the thing you are calling a "mandate".
>
> Field teams often go astray of their mandate. That doesn't make the
> mandate not a mandate.

it was never a mandate on the people who weren't part of the discussions 
of RFC 1726 or whose interests weren't aligned. so the answer to "when 
is something not a mandate?" would include this.

>>> My point is that this was expanded over time.
>>
>> my point is that such expansion was inevitable and should have been
>> expected and the people who ratified the mandate ought to have known
>> better.
>
> "Inevitable" is such a dangerous word. In this case, you've made a leap
> to its use that skips over so many complex human and social issues, it
> looks more like a statement of religion than engineering.

i appreciate your candor, sir. a single counterexample from history 
could mollify me. my own survey showed that whenever an equivalent 
opportunity, motive and means were present, the result might as well 
have been preordained.

-- 
P Vixie