Sandman
In article <ss3ia9l3mndb5a7tq4ksj9v96l0rk9eo9p@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:

Exactly - I was responding to Savageduck who had just described what he considered to be a backup protocol, which was something done manually.

Savageduck 11/25/2013 <2013112421034119589-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>

"I use the term "protocol" in many different situations including referring to my back-up plan, method, etc. as my "Back-up protocol" especially when it comes to back-up on a road trip. Then I have referred to it as my "Triple Redundant Back-up Protocol" when using my Colorspace UDMA, MBP, & FW800 1TB portable HDD. I have written that in these photo NGs many times"

Also - this is not a "definition" as you falsely call it. It is clearly prefixed with "my interpretation" of "the term", i.e. not "the word".

Eric Stevens
Wriggle wriggle wriggle.

Sandman
No wriggle necessary, it's just reality. And even so - if you interpreted that passage as me defining the word "protocol" to mean "something manually" then you interpreted it incorrectly. So maybe this is part of why you're so confused, then?

Eric Stevens
I then rubbed your nose in four undeniably real-world protocols. Then you started singing a different tune, which as it happens is now

Sandman
Why no quote of this supposed "rubbed your nose"? Stop merely claiming things.

Eric Stevens
You are a damned fool if you think readers need proof of this statement. You don't need it either.

Sandman
I do, very much. I am aware of no "nose rubbing" from you. Maybe it didn't arrive at my news server?

All I remember are your ignorant "black box" analogies and other misinformation about the word.

Eric Stevens
"The RFC's does not tell my how to code anything, it tells me how my application has to behave, and I can code that in a number of different ways."

Sandman
100% correct.

Eric Stevens
Now you are to definition (2) " ... it tells me how my application has to behave, and I can code that in a number of different ways."

Sandman
The quote above has no definition of the word "protocol", Eric. Stay focused! We we're talking about RFC's that deal with system communication, some of which have the word "protocol" in the name. This has always been totally unrelated to the topic of backup protocols. I was just correcting your misinformation above.

Eric Stevens
You haven't corrected anything.

Sandman
It's pretty much all I have done, Eric.

Eric Stevens
All you are doing is trying to confuse the issue.

Sandman
Haha! No need - you're doing that all by yourself.

Eric Stevens
There is nothing about use of the word protocol which when applied to backups gives it a different meaning than from when applied to different types of data transmission.

Sandman
Of course there is. You are very ignorant about the meaning of the word protocol.

Protocol

- the accepted or established code of procedure or behaviour in any group, organization, or situation

- (Computing) a set of rules governing the exchange or transmission of data between devices

*very* different use of the word protocol. And yes, those are dictionary definitions, Eric. I have been talking about the first definition all the time, and corrected Tony when he started to mention things that related only to the second definition.

Eric Stevens
Definitions (1) and (2) are mutually inconsistent and both can't be right.

Sandman
So the problem basically is that you can't read English to save your life. You will claim I have stated a definition of the word "protocol" when the quotes you supply for support of that claim shows me doing nothing of the kind. THis is poor, even for you, Eric. You COULD have found quotes of me defining the word, such as this one:

Eric Stevens
You agreed with Savageduck that 'a' (not 'the', not 'his', but 'a') ""backup protocol" is something you execute manually."

Sandman
Indeed. Not a "definition" of the word "protocol", but an interpretation of a term.

Sandman 11/26/2013 <slrnl98hmr.u9i.mr@irc.sandman.net>

"A protocol is a set of rules and/or steps in a given procedure."

See - that's me *defining* the word. Here's another:

Eric Stevens
And you were wrong, by your own later definition " ... it tells me how my application has to behave ...."

Sandman
The FTP protocol does, yes. BUt that's not the word I'm defining above, Einstein.

Sandman 11/29/2013 <slrnl9gdg6.99f.mr@irc.sandman.net>

"Again, a protocol is a list of actions you are to take in order to fulfill a given task."

Eric Stevens
Again you were wrong " ... it tells me how my application has to behave, and I can code that in a number of different ways." A list of actions isn't necessarily a protocol.

Sandman
But a protocol is a list of actions. And I wasn't wrong, I was 100% correct.

See - that's what a definition looks like. These are the kind of quotes you should have found from me where I have been incorrect. Alas, you have been unable to do so.

Eric Stevens
Clearly your use of the word 'protocol' has been incorrect on one occasion or the other. In fact your use of the term has been incorrect until 10th December.

Sandman
You just can't find these supposed incorrect usages of the term, now can you?

Eric Stevens
Why bother, when you keep producing them?

Sandman
So far, none have been produced.

Eric Stevens
don't try to argue that the RFCs are not protocols. The word 'Protocol' is in their respective titles.

Sandman
You're so ignorant, Eric. "RFC" is short for "Request for Comment" and can be about anything, mostly related to computers. Here is RFC 3986, a RFC that discusses URL's, not a single protocol in sight

Eric Stevens
Of course not. It's now called a 'scheme'.

Sandman
Captain Obvious strikes again.

<http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt>

WHen you say "RFC", you are in reference to a RFC *about* a protocol, like RFC 959, which is about FTP:

<http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc959.txt>

This is an RFC that talks about the File Transfer *Protocol*, but I'll repeat this once more - the concept of system communication protocol's wasn't the topic under discussion. Tony once used it as an example, but this was what I said about that at the time:

Sandman 11/26/2013 <slrnl9a72h.eo.mr@irc.sandman.net>

"Well, there's your problem. You think a protocol determines what a program does... Maybe that's why you were talking about the totally unrelated FTP before?"

See? The File Transfer Protocol most certainly determines what a program does when it wants to use FTP, but that has nothing to do with the usage of the term "backup protocol" - which is NOT something that determines what a program does.

Eric Stevens
That's a flabby argument which is hardly worth kicking out the door. Are you really trying to say that the File Transfer Protocol was introduced into a discussion about the proper use of the word 'protocol' for any reason other than to illustrate the use of the word 'protocol'?

Sandman
No, but then again, Tony was ignorant to do so. Take it up with him - he's the one who ignorantly brought it up.

Eric Stevens
Please, also, do not try to argue that a backup protocol is different from all other protocols in that it refers to manual operations. There is no reason why it can't apply to a network of servers which carry each other's backup data, rather the way news servers work. Such a network can operate entirely automatically and require no manual operations whatsoever.

Sandman
What? I've never said that backup protocols are only manual, it was my *opinion* that the term "backup protocol" mostly refers to a manual task, like the one Savageduck described.

Eric Stevens
You are a barefaced liar. You specifically wrote: " A"backup protocol" is something you execute manually."".

Sandman
Hey lie boy, here's the entire quote:

"That's my interpretation of the term as well, that a "backup protocol" is something you execute manually."

*CLEARLY* labeling it as a mere interpretation of *THE TERM* "backup protocol", not a *DEFINITION* of the *WORD* "protocol".

Interpretations aren't rigid and cut into stone, Einstein. It's just me interpreting a statement, and this is me saying that if someone says "backup protocol", I interprete this to be a manual procedure. This is *NOT* me saying that since I interprete it as such - it *CAN ONLY* be a manual procedure.

LEARN TO READ AND UNDERSTAND ENGLISH.

I have told Tony many times that I never ever claimed that it was *WRONG* of him to use the word "protocol":

Eric Stevens
So what? That doesn't mean your use of it was correct.

Sandman
Nor does it make it incorrect, and you have helped show that all my usages of the term has been 100% correct.

Paintshop and Corel 11/26/2013 <slrnl9a696.eo.mr@irc.sandman.net>

"Look - I'm perfectly fine with you calling someone's backup method as a "protocol", you got into this mess because you choose to be all condescending towards someone whose only crime was to say that he had never heard that particular term being used. You are free to use it for whatever you want! You can do your usenet-posting protocol, or your objective-mounting protocol or whatever!"

This was never about Tony not "understanding" the word protocol.

Eric Stevens
You have got that right.

Sandman
You have a hard time understanding it though. Here is one definition of the word protocol from you:

Eric Stevens Re: Paintshop and Corel 11/28/2013 <gpgf99pcs9vdum7gifh0bnjc18ti5pbfk0@4ax.com>

"The user's backup protocol for the single button backup might say 'I shall use the single button backup every day at lunch time' or 'once a week' or 'whenever I have done something important' or 'I'm never going to use it'."

Here you're equating the word "protocol" with "schedule", and you're also actually saying that a user's backup protocol can be defined as "I'm never going to use it" which is just ludicrous.

And guess what - regardless of your ignorance about the word itself, that's a *MANUAL* procedure you're describing above. Strange that, huh.