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(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf