Network equipment frequently suffers from intermittent problems that will
drive you completely bonkers, so nothing in your description eliminates a
failure in the modem or your router. I agree with Ned that that could be
the issue.
The cable modem is assigned the dynamic public IP address.
From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of John Abreau
Replacing X.509 requires that every site you want to visit switch away from
X.509 as well.
Convincing the whole world to embrace a crypto flag day is an enormously
On 11/24/2014 3:55 AM, discuss-requ...@blu.org wrote:
the cable modem refused Netgear R6300V2 a DHCP address on the WAN side.
Connect the PC directly to their modem and voila! DHCP worked. Any
suggestions?
Just to make sure, have you tried rebooting the cable modem in between
those attempts?
Related to the discussion of how X509 is broken and various hacks to
make it work:
What I would really like to see is a scheme adopted like SPF for mail: a
TXT DNS entry for your domain that has the CA (or a fingerprint for the
CA, or maybe the whole public cert). That way you can be
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 08:33:11PM -0500, Richard Pieri wrote:
What I don't understand -- and maybe don't want to understand -- is
why you are jumping through hoops to bolt kludges onto X.509 instead
of working to replace X.509 with something that has verifiable trust
baked in.
I think the
On 11/24/2014 3:20 PM, Derek Martin wrote:
It is a practical impossibility for you (or your organization) to
actually truly authenticate each and every entity with whom you do
business on the Internet. The problem is compounded by the needs of
I don't agree with the base assertion. I don't
On 11/24/2014 1:52 PM, Matthew Gillen wrote:
What I would really like to see is a scheme adopted like SPF for mail: a
TXT DNS entry for your domain that has the CA (or a fingerprint for the
CA, or maybe the whole public cert). That way you can be unequivocal
about who the valid CA for your
