[184139] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Recent trouble with QUIC?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Saku Ytti)
Sun Sep 27 23:20:10 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <560899FC.6010405@lcrcomputer.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 20:20:06 -0700
From: Saku Ytti <saku@ytti.fi>
To: Lyle Giese <lyle@lcrcomputer.net>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 27 September 2015 at 18:38, Lyle Giese <lyle@lcrcomputer.net> wrote:
> Part of freedom is to minimize the harm and I think that is where the
> parties replying to this thread diverge. A broken change that causes harm
> should have/could have been tested better before releasing it to the public
> on the Internet.
>
> Or if a bad release is let loose on the Internet, how does Google minimize
> the harm?
How would this be any different by google introducing TCP related
issue in their frontend servers? This is not a protocol issue, this is
QA issue that could impact arbitrary technology. I'd like to say I've
not broken stuff by misunderstanding impact of my changes, but
unfortunately I can't.
--
++ytti
