Difference between revisions of "Book/Patterns in Network Architecture"

From PKC
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 17: Line 17:
|text=
|text=


*Architecture is doing the algebra, before doing the arithmetic.
*Architecture is doing the [[algebra]], before doing the [[arithmetic]].
*A good (network) architect suffers from the topologist’s vision defect. He can’t tell a coffee cup from a doughnut.
*A good (network) architect suffers from the topologist’s vision defect. He can’t tell a coffee cup from a doughnut.
*Architecture is maximizing the [[invariance]]s and minimizing the discontinuities.
*Architecture is maximizing the [[invariance]]s and minimizing the discontinuities.

Revision as of 01:13, 25 February 2023

Day, John (2008). Patterns in Network Architecture - a return to fundamentals. local page: Prentice Hall. ISBN 9780132252423. 


Architects' Motto

*Architecture is doing the algebra, before doing the arithmetic.

  • A good (network) architect suffers from the topologist’s vision defect. He can’t tell a coffee cup from a doughnut.
  • Architecture is maximizing the invariances and minimizing the discontinuities.
    — John Day [1]

Naming and Addressing

Starting on Chapter 5[2] of this book: Naming and Addressing, the notion of naming, and its history has been explicitly described in the chapter. On Chapter 8, the notion of Name and Addressing is formally defined and related to logic and topology again.

China had no Euclid

There was essentially no tradition of theory in Chinese science, and certainly not axiomatic theory, of systematizing the results. Needham points out that the body of knowledge represented by Chinese science was more a set of individual techniques than an organized corpus of knowledge.

...

Without a unifying theory to simplify knowledge, the amount of information was eventually overwhelming. But theory is much more than just a mnemonic. A theory, even a partial one, leads to deeper understanding of the phenomena being studied and to further insights. Proposals of a unifying theory (even if unsuccessful) raise questions relating disparate phenomena that would not otherwise arise. When there is a theoretical framework, results can be derived that were far from obvious before. Theory not only provides a simpler, more logical explanation, but it also has a tendency to simplify individual techniques (making them easier to understand and apply). Many techniques coalesce to become degenerate cases of a more general method. To see this, one only need read accounts of electricity and magnetism before Maxwell, chemistry before the periodic chart, or geology before plate tectonics.

— John Day [3]

References

  1. ↑ Day, John (2008). Patterns in Network Architecture - a return to fundamentals. local page: Prentice Hall. ISBN 9780132252423.  , Chapter 1, Page 1
  2. ↑ Day, John (2008). Patterns in Network Architecture - a return to fundamentals. local page: Prentice Hall. ISBN 9780132252423.  , Chapter 5, Page 145~184
  3. ↑ Day, John (2008). Patterns in Network Architecture - a return to fundamentals. local page: Prentice Hall. ISBN 9780132252423.  , Page 369-370

Related Pages

Authored by:John Day


Retrieved from "https://pkc.pub/index.php?title=Book/Patterns_in_Network_Architecture&oldid=38424"