Re: Getting to consensus on packet number encryption

[Ted Hardie <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Roberto Peon <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Also, Prism.
>
> -=R
>
>
>
That's a little more succinct than I would be, but yes.  How does an
application know that the flow it is initiating will traverse a topology
that is deemed to be within a controlled environment?  You can say
"configuration" but I fear it will turn up on a post-it
<https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--Edu6LPu9--/c_scale,f_auto,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/194thbtyencs0jpg.jpg>if
you do.  Loads shift, resources move, and suddenly you find that host which
used to be in the same rack, being down, has load-shifted to the next
instance,  in a datacenter 500 miles away across a very different network.

Many modern deployments are also in someone else's data center, so saying
"Data center networks" doesn't say much about why you're trusting the
network inside.

Ted


> Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz=[e-mail]>
> Date: 5/1/18 5:25 AM (GMT-08:00)
> To: Benjamin Kaduk <bkaduk=[e-mail]>, Praveen
> Balasubramanian <pravb=[e-mail]>
> Cc: IETF QUIC WG <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: Getting to consensus on packet number encryption
>
>     > I disagree that we need any more data for not doing PNE in the
> datacenter. Why would we add an extra encrypt-decrypt step for no obvious
> benefit?
>
> I am concerned that people will mis-interpret the meaning of a datacenter,
> and think that a bunch of servers, or even a rack, in an open colo space is
> a "datacenter."  Computers keep getting faster.
>
>