On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 04:32:44PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > an easy justification is possibly 90+percent of ISP customers in the > world have contracts that preclude "server" operation.
But that is an annoying limitation to begin with--and not just for people trying to be the next Yahoo. One of the things that makes the internet is cool that an arbitrary packet can be sent from one arbitrary IP address to another arbitrary IP address. ISPs with "no servers" requirements mostly reduce the internet to "you may browse the web". There is a difference between the internet and the world wide web!, we need to keep reminding ourselves of that and explaining it to those who don't know. I run my own "server" and most of what happens there is an e-mail server and an sshd that I log into. By running my own e-mail server I can have e-mail selectively forward to my Palm VII, I can have my numeric pager poked to let me know my Palm has e-mail. If I couldn't run my own server I would have to poll someone else's, and I couldn't control my own addresses (my wife does personal e-mail through that box too). As manufacturers start to assume that RJ-45 jacks that connect to the internet are common, there are all kinds of cool things that become possible, but many would technically be servers. Hell, we currently have remote Oregon Scientific thermometers at home. I think it would be neat to have them connected to the internet. That way I could look at them from work--but also from the living room via my Palm VII. If one thinks of the internet as a universal digital connection between "stuff" the ability to run "servers" is crucial. -kb, the Kent who is in favor of policing bad behavior, but who opposes bans on flexibility in an attempt to prevent bad behavior. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
