On Wednesday, August 5, 2015, Roland Dobbins <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 5 Aug 2015, at 12:37, Ca By wrote: > > Constantly re-evaluated is not scalable. >> > > It is in fact scalable, given network infrastructure with sufficient > instrumentation capabilities/capacity and sufficient telemetry > collection/analysis. Many organizations do this today. > > Not everyone has those things, however. They should, and eventually most > will, but it takes time. > > The other factor is the reliable automation of policy construction and > deployment based on said analysis. Besides the usual gaps and hurdles > (standardization of mechanisms still in its relative infancy, lack of > skills/resources in many organizations to perform systems integration, et. > al.), there is a potential for cascading, feedback loops, and other > undesirable forms of oscillation. > > I am open to more discussion here. I do not want to be ambiguous >> > > Many folks here might generally agree that we don't want to see tons more > UDP dumped into the cesspit (QUIC and WebRTC come to mind, as Dan Wing > notes) in the current situation, but flatly stating 'no more new UDP, ever' > may have difficulty n the necessary consensus in the broader arena. > > That being said, QUIC and WebRTC in particular are significantly > problematic on the operational side of things due to many aspects of this > general problem-set. Some middle ground between 'no new UDP, ever' and > 'let's switch all Web traffic over to UDP, because it'd be cool' ought to > be possible, no? > > Yes. Can you please suggest text? CB > ----------------------------------- > Roland Dobbins <[email protected]> > > _______________________________________________ > OPSEC mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec >
_______________________________________________ OPSEC mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
