add LRP notes in microservices

README.md

@@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ We can apply the above scale-agnostic principle to microservices architecture as
 
 I once consulted a startup where a team of three developers introduced 17(!) microservices. They were 10 months behind schedule and appeared nowhere close to the public release. Every new requirement led to changes in 4+ microservices. Diagnostic difficulty in integration space skyrocketed. Both time to market and cognitive load were unacceptably high. `🤯`  
 
-Is this the right way to approach the uncertainty of a new system? It's enormously difficult to elicit the right logical boundaries in the beginning, and by introducing too many microservices we make things worse. The team's only justification was: "The F(M)AANG companies proved microservices architecture to be effective". *Hello, you got to stop dreaming big.*
+Is this the right way to approach the uncertainty of a new system? It's enormously difficult to elicit the right logical boundaries in the beginning. The key is to make decisions as late as you can responsibly wait, because that is when you have the most information on which to base the decision. By introducing a network layer we make our design decisions hard to revert right from the start. The team's only justification was: "The F(M)AANG companies proved microservices architecture to be effective". *Hello, you got to stop dreaming big.*
 
 The [Tanenbaum-Torvalds debate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanenbaum%E2%80%93Torvalds_debate) argued that Linux's monolithic design was flawed and obsolete, and that a microkernel architecture should be used instead. Indeed, the microkernel design seemed to be superior "from a theoretical and aesthetical" point of view. Three decades on, microkernel-based GNU Hurd is still in development, and monolithic Linux is everywhere - this page is powered by Linux, your smart teapot is powered by Linux.