Re: MBone

On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 04:50:17 PDT, "Kevin C. Almeroth" said:

> Better yet, try RFC3171.  Bottom-line:  there are weak links in the chain.
> But, if those weak links weren't there, other links would be weak links,
> and THOSE weak links would still be weak enough to require using encryption.
> It just so happens that the weak multicast links are only a bit weaker than
> the unicast links.  Understand that convoluted logic?  :-)
By the same logic, if the next-stronger links for multicast still require
crypto, and the *weak* multicast links are only a bit weaker than unicast,
then the next-stronger ones are probably stronger than unicast - therefor
unicast should be using crypto too. (Understand THAT convoluted logic? ;)

Oh wait.. the security-conscious *are* using crypto on unicast - there's
a reason things like 'ssh' are popular... :)
-- 
                                Valdis Kletnieks
                                Computer Systems Senior Engineer
                                Virginia Tech

pgpXRXBbMOzE4.pgp
Description: PGP signature