Re: ``WHY TAP?'': A White Paper

"Daniel J. Bernstein" <brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> Mon, 24 August 1992 02:21 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06078; 23 Aug 92 22:21 EDT
Received: from NRI.NRI.Reston.Va.US by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id ab06074; 23 Aug 92 22:21 EDT
Received: from ietf.NRI.Reston.Va.US by NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01560; 23 Aug 92 22:23 EDT
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06069; 23 Aug 92 22:21 EDT
Received: from NRI.NRI.Reston.Va.US by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06065; 23 Aug 92 22:21 EDT
Received: from KRAMDEN.ACF.NYU.EDU by NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01550; 23 Aug 92 22:22 EDT
Received: from LOCALHOST by KRAMDEN.ACF.NYU.EDU (5.61/1.34) id AA22278; Mon, 24 Aug 92 02:22:48 GMT
Message-Id: <9208240222.AA22278@KRAMDEN.ACF.NYU.EDU>
To: Mike StJohns <stjohns@umd5.umd.edu>, "Mark D. Baushke" <mdb@cisco.com>, ident@NRI.Reston.VA.US
Subject: Re: ``WHY TAP?'': A White Paper
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:22:40 +0100
From: "Daniel J. Bernstein" <brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>

Mike StJohns writes:
> Please move this discussion off the ident mailing list.

Why? The white paper is partially in response to a technical message
from Ted Ts'o *on the Ident list* about the security added by Ident. The
contents of the white paper are quite relevant to the current Ident
spec.

In particular, as pointed out by Chris Davis months ago, selective
blocking is a perfectly sensible application, but it's prohibited by the
Ident spec's auditing restriction.

Several people have objected to the current security section: in
particular, to the way in which it prohibits valid applications. You've
singlehandedly squashed these objections. That may be how the NSA treats
objections, but in the IAB standards process you're supposed to respond
to objections on a technical level. Remember the word ``consensus''? Do
you know what it means? (This is a question, not an insult.)

---Dan