Slashdot Mirror
Dijkstra's Manuscripts Available Online
Bodrius writes "Salon has a short but interesting article called GOTO considered joyful, about E. W. Dijkstra's manuscripts, as published by the University of Texas, and their bloggish nature.
I'm not sure if the blog analogy is that accurate, but the articles are a must read for computer scientists and geeks in general." (Annoying but free click-through system for non-subscribers.)
Here is a brief bio on Edsger Dijkstra.
Unique signatures are rare.
Dijkstra was the 1972 recipient of the ACM Turing Award, often viewed as the Nobel Prize for computing. He was a member of the Netherlands Royal Academy of Arts and Sciences, a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a Distinguished Fellow of the British Computer Society. He received the 1974 AFIPS Harry Goode Award, the 1982 IEEE Computer Pioneer Award, and the 1989 ACM SIGCSE Award for Outstanding Contributions to Computer Science Education. Athens University of Economics awarded him an honorary doctorate in 2001. In 2002, the C&C Foundation of Japan recognized Dijkstra "for his pioneering contributions to the establishment of the scientific basis for computer software through creative research in basic software theory, algorithm theory, structured programming, and semaphores". From: http://www.cs.utexas.edu/home/news/articles/index2 002/ewdobit.html
I can't imagine him being important today, can you?
You have entirely missed the point.
If you know math and language theory the actual language you currently know does not matter. Language is a tool. You can learn to use a new tool in a matter of weeks if not days. Math is the knowledge on how to use all of the tools, not just the particular shiny one that has just been produced last week.
After learning 5 or 6, the next one comes in a matter of days. Been there, seen that, trying to do it.
This has not changed since Dykstra and ain't going to change. Ever. This is the fact known as the 5 times salary difference between the factory floor and the chief designer office.
It is a fact of life, it exists in all industries and it is here to stay.
Actually, Asimov has described this brilliantly in one of his novells. Read "Profession". It is thy best novell he ever wrote.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
The Internet uses Border Gateway Protocol (BGPv4), which is a Path-Vector routing protocol. OSPF is a Link-State routing protocol.
OSPF is considered an IGP (Interior Gateway Protocol). It can be used within an autonomous system, but has no place in determining path selection for traffic between automonous systems.
As far as IGPs go, there's only one that would be capable of handling the routing table for the entire Internet, and it's not OSPF. IS-IS, Intermediate Syetem to Intermediate System, is another Link-State protocol developed by the OSI during the same period when OSPF was being developed.
They share a lot of similar features, and address all of the same shortcomings inherent to Distance-Vector routing protocols (RIP, IGRP). You can actually redistribute the full Internet routing table from BGP into IS-IS, and it will handle the strain.
Aside from the ability to handle astronomically large routing tables, IS-IS has one additional feature that sets it above OSPF: No requirement for a single backbone area (Area 0, in OSPF speak).
OSPF is not particularly well suited to "meshy" environments, due to the need for a single, clearly defined backbone area (In OSPF, all traffic between non-backbone areas must traverse Area 0). IS-IS alleviates this requirement. There can be multiple Inter-area paths, which can be very useful in a complex network.
Of course, the pool of IS-IS savvy network engineers is far smaller than that of the OSPF disciples, so you don't see it in use very often. The exception is in the service provider space. Big ISPs, and Backbone Carriers frequently utilize IS-IS when an IGP is called for, notably for it's ability to handle large routing tables.
(Don't get me wrong... I'm a fan of OSPF, but much like the programmer folks like to say, "It's just a tool in the toolbox." The savvy network engineer will utilize the Routing Protocol which best suits his requirements (In some cases he'll use more than one), just as the savvy programmer with utilize the programming language that best suits his requirements.)
In summary:
For those that would die defending it, Freedom
has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.