good or bad?
I would argue, that in the long term, DNS *should* merge with Directory
services.
Kyle Lussier
> Directory service = a software system that responds to requests
> for information about entities, e.g. people in an organization.
> It's a system for managing access to computer r
e question is.. is it?
I am sure it's been discussed before, can someone point
me to how the "RAMBUS" scenario is prevented?
Regards,
Kyle Lussier
then...we had only just invested in a good design.
As the pain of limited IP space increases, so shall we switch
and NAT's will someday be no more.
The question is, how much will we inflict upon ourselves in the
pursuit of making NAT's work? I hope this time around we
fix the problem earlier
Kyle Lussier
www.AutoNOC.com
vices, and then you can renumber pretty much at will. But there are
problems there also.
I realize ipv6 renumbering has probably been covered in depth, but
is there any more thoughts incorporated into it related to provider
renumbering?
Kyle Lussier
www.AutoNOC.com
he difference in this suggestion from NATs is
that it should be logical and defined on IPv6 requiring
no actual translation.
In summary, IPv6 should support absolute addressing as well
as relative addressing, and even indexed addressing as
primitive IPv6 operations.
Kyle Lussier
www.AutoNOC.com
of sevice providers.
But does anyone have a better idea for business users?
Kyle Lussier
www.AutoNOC.com
l charge $10,000 per year for using .Net My Services and
$1,500
per application."
Kyle Lussier
www.AutoNOC.com
icrosoft rep in e-mail, and I made the comment
that I was going to have to hire someone just to figure out all these
licensing issues, handle product activiation, and compliance things,
and the person responded:
> ROFLMAO!
She didn't realize I wasn't making a joke.
Kyle Lussier
www.AutoNOC.com
thout paying any fees? Or is
"registration/testing" required?
Kyle Lussier
ers! And so I find it all very interesting.
Love it or hate it, the new "majority market" is the mixed Windows/Linux
shop.
Kyle Lussier
www.AutoNOC.com
he desktop. But in
the back end, for the majority of our customers it is a core
platform, and increasingly so.
Kyle Lussier
he thing that was neat about a trademark is it was a marketing
advantage for the vendor as well as a cash generator for the IETF,
but maybe it's not the "truely correct" solution.
Kyle Lussier
AutoNOC LLC
e add
to them. It may be that our product would benefit more from that
than others, but I know we would buy enough to cover the cost of
the trademark over a year or two, at a minimum.
Kyle Lussier
o a long
way torwards helping secure the jobs of our CIOs by reducing
interoperability headaches and vendor standards infighting.
Kyle Lussier
AutoNOC LLC
s you've hired to vet all this. And finally, if you can
> work in seven layers somewhere I'd be willing to resurrect some old T-shirts
> from the early nineties for you, back from before people started taking the IETF
> this seriously...
Don't blame me, I'm just a visionary trying to offer new possible
solutions :).
Kyle Lussier
AutoNOC LLC
you
> are so zealously promoting.
Well, it was just an idea. I saw support from a couple others for
something like it.
I'll write it off as juedge to be impractical.
I would like to thank everyone for their feedback, it was thorough,
novel, and intelligent.
Kyle Lussier
AutoNOC LLC
we double
our costs, we couble our expenses, and things move at
half-speed. Love it or not, this is a problem we all
will have to deal with, for a long time.
And if not the IETF to solve this problem then who?
It's easy to villify an idea that may or may not
be appropriate, but we're sti
oducts
as well as get some money to have some IETF parties. :)
This will only be a pain in the butt for the 1% of particularly
powerful vendors who are unwilling to support IETF standards.
Kyle Lussier
AutoNOC LLC
aren't being a good vendor, and you said you would be, it
gives them an angle to push. A slow, bureaucratic one, but a way
to lead vendors, through reward, to do the right thing.
Kyle Lussier
AutoNOC LLC
thing I always hated about certification/conformance, blah blah,
is that it imposes a static, fixed cost on all parties and isn't
issue driven. I like this idea, because you pay your $100, you
get improved product marketability in return, and it is totally
problem or issue driven, as opposed to a static/fixed cost being
eaten by all vendors, good or bad.
Kyle Lussier
AutoNOC LLC
this idea, everyone is born "RICH".. but did you ever try to
take away a rich person's money? That's like this idea is.
Rich people fight their asses off to stay rich. That's what
this logo is all about. Your born "RICH", but if you misbehave,
you can lose all your money.
Kyle Lussier
AutoNOC LLC
st similar to is citizenship,
such as US citizenship. Which takes *0* effort to gain, and
means *A LOT*.
:)
Kyle Lussier
AutoNOC LLC
#x27;s not part of the IETF. That may be
the correct answer, I don't know. That's what we're here to
find out.
Never bring a criticism to the table without a better solution :).
Kyle Lussier
government, for the fact you had to go
through that.
So I guess the thing we can learn from INS is to streamline the
"naturalization" process for external proprietary products? :)
Kyle Lussier
AutoNOC LLC
the ISOC as a body to do this kind of thing.
Is it also public opinion that the ISOC should or shouldn't do
something like this?
I agree with all of everything being said. We mostly just need
to find the "right" body to do this kind of thing, and it's
still gotta be a "jur
25 matches
Mail list logo
