See one of many stuxnet related articles: _http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/innovation/09/24/stuxnet.computer.malware/index.html?iref=allsearch_ (http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/innovation/09/24/stuxnet.computer.malware/index. html?iref=allsearch)
(http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/innovation/09/24/stuxnet.computer.malware/index.html?iref=allsearch) IMHO a future internet architecture should also envision attacks like stuxnet and even worse ones. By some former email I mentioned that any architecture which depends on a "spine" like the LISP's ALT or similar alternatives would be very vulnerable wrt to malicious attacks. When I wrote my draft-hummel-tara-00.txt I forgot to mention this argument in favor of TARA (which does not depend on any such basis). I would also like to raise the question about having an alternate backup-solution for the case of "emergency" wrt the entire/large parts of the internet - similar to the seafarer's situation: By night he may use the stars as a backup alternative to navigation based on the compass needle. TARA with its RIB-replacement of about 3000 TARA-links and its FIB-replacement comprising a fix-sized table t1 of 64800 entries, a fix-sized table t2 of 3600 entries, few tables t3 of length 60 and further few tables t4 of length 60 would be small enough to co-exist in parallel to any other of the allegeably more persuasive mainstream architectures. Comments? Heiner
_______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
