nanog mailing list archives

Re: Recent trouble with QUIC?


From: Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 20:20:06 -0700

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


Current thread: