Hey Chris et al, On 12/07/2012 03:34 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote: ... snip ...
> I think somewhere 5-8 messages back Arturo's note that: > 1) hosted model is just a crutch > 2) hosted model isn't intended for everyone to use > 3) most large ISP or large operations groups are expected to run their own > CA > The hosted model is just about right for probably around ~80% of the routing participants out there. I don't think it's just a crutch, I think it answers a real community (or should I rather say, market) demand. It might have started as one, but IMO it hit a nail in the head. Let's face it: Most sites out there are not as technology-literate as we might light them to be. The dangers of screwing their own CA, losing their keys and mismanaging their publications are much higher if their host their own than if they trust a specialized third party. Hosted fills a gap. Sure, I don't think France Telecom, Verizon or Telmex should use hosted, they can do better. But the folk holding one AS, a /48 and a couple of IPv4 /22s, well, they are mostly better off using hosted. The good thing here is that hosted is _optional_ (I think we are forgetting about this fact in all of this discussion). If you don't want it and want to get your feet wet, please go up/down. > coupled with eric's notes that: > 1) hosted seems fragile for lots of operations > 2) people should think long and hard about using the hosted model of > controlling their own fate > > gets the general gist of my point: "If you use the hosted model you > are equivalently outsourcing your Mail/SMTP infrastructure to another > person, be sure you want to do that..." Agree, people are still responsible for making conscious decisions. Then, taking your example, how many small ops right now host their own email? Probably not many. Warm regards, ~Carlos _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
