CH and p2p [Re: [Isms] ISMS charter broken- onus should be on WG to fix it]

Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com> Thu, 15 September 2005 08:36 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EFpEn-0002Zq-6g; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 04:36:57 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EFpEk-0002ZZ-Mh for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 04:36:54 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA26942 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 04:36:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mtagate3.de.ibm.com ([195.212.29.152]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EFpJV-000184-9P for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 04:41:50 -0400
Received: from d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.167.49]) by mtagate3.de.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j8F8acTZ091468 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 08:36:39 GMT
Received: from d12av01.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12av01.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.165.212]) by d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VERS6.7) with ESMTP id j8F8achP101372 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:36:38 +0200
Received: from d12av01.megacenter.de.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d12av01.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j8F8abhx013962 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:36:38 +0200
Received: from sihl.zurich.ibm.com (sihl.zurich.ibm.com [9.4.16.232]) by d12av01.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j8F8abum013936; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:36:37 +0200
Received: from zurich.ibm.com (sig-9-145-128-234.de.ibm.com [9.145.128.234]) by sihl.zurich.ibm.com (AIX4.3/8.9.3p2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA54776; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:36:35 +0200
Message-ID: <4329328E.2080407@zurich.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:36:30 +0200
From: Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>
Organization: IBM
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113
X-Accept-Language: en, fr, de
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michael Thomas <mat@cisco.com>
References: <200509131506.j8DF664A016810@pacific-carrier-annex.mit.edu> <tslhdcokeed.fsf@cz.mit.edu> <20050913204555.GA14153@boskop.local> <tslbr2wk78f.fsf@cz.mit.edu> <3C03BDBD60783D559EDAE652@sirius.fac.cs.cmu.edu> <01LSZP7AGR0Y000092@mauve.mrochek.com> <432886C4.9040606@cisco.com> <01LT0ZC5UEV8000092@mauve.mrochek.com> <4328C102.2010201@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4328C102.2010201@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0ddefe323dd869ab027dbfff7eff0465
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ietfdbh@comcast.net, david.kessens@nokia.com, Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>, 'IETF Discussion' <ietf@ietf.org>, 'Eliot Lear' <lear@cisco.com>
Subject: CH and p2p [Re: [Isms] ISMS charter broken- onus should be on WG to fix it]
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

If you want to discuss this as a generic issue, please do so
with an appropriate subject and without cross posting. Thanks.

BTW I agree that there is a generic architectural issue here
that merits discussion.

    Brian


Michael Thomas wrote:
> Ned Freed wrote:
> 
>>> Ned Freed wrote:
>>> > If I were to object to Eliot's proposal (I don't - in fact I strongly
>>> > support
>>> > it), it would be on the grounds that the IETF should be taking a long
>>> > hard look
>>> > at the issues surrounding call home in general, not just in the 
>>> special
>>> > case of
>>> > SNMP.
>>
>>
>>
>>> I'll bite: what could the IETF do if it looked
>>> long and hard?
>>
>>
>>
>> Well, the one approach that immediately comes to mind is that the 
>> introduction
>> of a third party might provide a means of getting timely information 
>> about
>> software updates without sacrificing user privacy.
>>
>> Such a third party would act as a repository for update information 
>> provided by
>> vendors. Applications would then "call home" to one of these repositories
>> rather than directly to the vendor. Various anonymyzing tricks could be
>> employed to minimize information leakage even if the third party was
>> compromised.
> 
> 
> You mean we could invent Bitorrent? :)
> 
>         Mike, doesn't it strike others as odd
>          that ietf is completely outside of the
>          p2p bizness?
> 


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf