Re: network controls are necessary

[Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>]

>>>>> "Joel" == Joel M Halpern <joel@stevecrocker.com> writes:
    Joel> In one regard, you end up needing significantly more logic in the host to 
    Joel> make any kind of intelligent choice.  This means more code, more state, and 
    Joel> more things for the network administrator to configure (probably incorrectly.)
    Joel> Secondly, you couple the hosts into the behavior of the rest of the routing 
    Joel> system, reducing the ability of the system to cope with changes (either 
    Joel> network changes or protocol changes.)

  On the other hand, it scales, and is far more friendly to end-to-end.

  The host already has to maintain the indexes to demux the connections, and
may already have significant state invested in the connection.

    Joel> If we really want the hosts to make the choice (a concept I am doubtful of) 
    Joel> I suppose we could invent a query / response protocol for the purpose of 
    Joel> asking a routing intelligent server what source /dest pair from a given set 
    Joel> of sources and dests would be a good pair to use.

  Yes, we will need such a protocol.

]       ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine.           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
] panic("Just another Debian GNU/Linux using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [