Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> Brian E Carpenter writes:
> > Indeed, it is clear that users who wish to be protected against
> > anthing beyond source/destination traffic analysis cannot use
> > the proposed flow-label diffserv mechanism. That's a user trade-off,
> > not a decision for the IETF to make.
>
> Moving the lose-lose situation to the user does
> not seem like a very useful recommendation. We
> shouldn't be in the business of letting end users
> decide which lossage due to bad architectural
> assumptions is better. Foisting the NAT
> hackitecture on the world was bad enough and
> is probably the single largest source of
> entropy we face; we shouldn't take this sort
> of thing lightly.
I don't take it lightly, but many users simply don't care about traffic
analysis risks and there is no argument for penalising them; the users
who do care will *inevitably* lose something in exchange for hiding
their traffic type; that is truly a zero-sum game.
Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
