nanog mailing list archives
Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT)
From: John Kristoff <jtk () northwestern edu>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 20:20:23 -0500
On 19 Apr 2004 22:16:58 +0000 Paul Vixie <vixie () vix com> wrote:
[(*) "wierd" could mean streams of tcp/syn or tcp/rst, or forged source addresses, or streams of unanswered udp, or streams of ourbound tcp/25, or udp/137..139, or who knows what it'll be by this time next month?]
Precisely. It could be most anything and likely will be eventually. Why not stop the hacks that are filtering, whitelists and rate limiting and just replace end hosts with dumb terminals, the links with fixed rate channels and in the network place all the controls and content? Instead of network service providers we would mostly be a collection of systems operators.
inside the headend, or whatever), it's going to get done by the dreaded giant merciless monster known as "market forces".
This and the installed base is probably why the above won't occur over night, but things are veering in that direction. While end users will resist many attempts to remove their freedom of bits, freedom of cpu and freedom of connectivity, what is being designed, or better, re-designed is a network with a very fragile infrastructure. This is good for no one. The ideas about tussle (D. Clark, et al) are a way to think about the problems and solutions, but still the difficulty, because of market forces and installed base, is how to get there from here. John
Current thread:
- Re: Lazy network operators - NOT, (continued)
- Re: Lazy network operators - NOT Sean Donelan (Apr 18)
- Re: Lazy network operators - NOT Doug White (Apr 18)
- Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Sean Donelan (Apr 18)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Brandon Shiers (Apr 18)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Petri Helenius (Apr 18)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Henry Yen (Apr 18)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Peter Galbavy (Apr 19)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Michael Painter (Apr 19)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Patrick W . Gilmore (Apr 19)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Paul Vixie (Apr 19)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) John Kristoff (Apr 19)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Chris Brenton (Apr 19)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Brian Russo (Apr 19)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Chris Brenton (Apr 19)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Brian Russo (Apr 19)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Jeff Shultz, WIllamette Valley Internet (Apr 19)
- RE: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Geo. (Apr 19)
- Re: Microsoft XP SP2 (was Re: Lazy network operators - NOT) Alexei Roudnev (Apr 19)
- Re: Lazy network operators - NOT Paul Vixie (Apr 19)
- Re: Lazy network operators - NOT Sean Donelan (Apr 19)
- Re: Lazy network operators - NOT Matt Hess (Apr 18)