John Lowry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The world of computing and communication sure looks different 40+
> years later.
> So I encourage you to look at QKD in context.  I know everything is
> moving in "internet time" but remember just how recently QKD has
> been dragged off of the physics optics bench by some engineers to
> see what can be done with it.  Also, a small revolution has been
> taking place while discussion (on this list anyway) has focused on
> 1st generation QKD.  Several very high speed (up to nominal line
> speed) systems have been proposed.  Long-haul all- optical networks
> are being researched, and some will be built.  The problem of
> authentication is well understood, even it it hasn't been solved.

The issue isn't the speed of the QKD systems, or the distance that
they run over. Those are false issues. The issue is that they
provide you with much less than conventional technologies give you,
and at a high price.


1) No one is contending that QKD doesn't work as advertised per
   se. The problem is that the advertised functionality is not what
   anyone wants.
2) The technology is a lead balloon. It gives you nothing that you
   don't already have, but at an unaffordable price, and on top of it,
   it gives you *much less* than you already have -- for example, it
   is more or less useless in providing security in an internet
   context -- the internet is all about getting rid of dedicated point
   to point connections.

> Of course, you have to keep up with the literature and not remain
> stuck in the '80s with BB84.

You remember people saying that networks would never work. (I don't
remember that kind of statement being made, but never mind.) You
encourage us to remember all the things people were negative on but
became big hits.

I encourage you to remember bubble memory, DCE, jet packs, and assorted
other technologies that went nowhere fast.


The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to