<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What’s wrong with the Internet &#8211; SMTP</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ilya-sher.org/blog/post/inet-wrong-smtp/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ilya-sher.org/blog/post/inet-wrong-smtp/</link>
	<description>A13F3BBB1F25347775112B56DBC19072</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Feb 2011 11:32:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://ilya-sher.org/blog/post/inet-wrong-smtp/#comment-227</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Feb 2011 11:32:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sshoverpci.com/blog/post/inet-wrong-smtp/#comment-227</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve held this view (text-protocols are absurd) for a long time. What I find most perplexing is that these protocols (HTTP, FTP included) were all conceived in the age where network resources were very lmited.

The only argument I&#039;ve ever heard in support of text protocols is that they are &quot;easy to debug&quot; and even if we were to assume this is at all a valid reason I fail to see how it outweighs the severe performance penalty and furthermore the security vulnerabilities that are rendered applicable by using such a ridiculously complicated encoding.

My only explaination is that these standards were not conjured by anywhere near software engineering (although they most probably were, which is quite depressing)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve held this view (text-protocols are absurd) for a long time. What I find most perplexing is that these protocols (HTTP, FTP included) were all conceived in the age where network resources were very lmited.</p>
<p>The only argument I&#8217;ve ever heard in support of text protocols is that they are &#8220;easy to debug&#8221; and even if we were to assume this is at all a valid reason I fail to see how it outweighs the severe performance penalty and furthermore the security vulnerabilities that are rendered applicable by using such a ridiculously complicated encoding.</p>
<p>My only explaination is that these standards were not conjured by anywhere near software engineering (although they most probably were, which is quite depressing)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

