Feel that this is more down the line of RFC 7511, no? ;-)

—Dennis


On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 07:25 J. Hellenthal via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
See RFC 1149 & 2549

;-)

--
 J. Hellenthal

The fact that there's a highway to Hell but only a stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.

> On Oct 7, 2019, at 11:29, Keith Medcalf <kmedcalf@dessus.com> wrote:
>
> 
>> On Monday, 7 October, 2019 08:55, Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 04:42:11PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>
>>> Otherwise, an impressive amount of WTF. My favorite: "while
>>> communication by servers ___on the ground___ might take hundreds of
>>> milliseconds, in the cloud the same operation may take only one
>>> millisecond from one machine to another"
>
>> My favorite: "The researchers expect their cloud-based system will be
>> more secure than the Internet is today [...]"  Apparently they're
> blissfully
>> unaware that there is no such thing as "cloud security".
>
> I would be interested to know how one connects to their "cloud"?  Do I
> need an "Evaporation Adapter" for my computer to send to their cloud?
> And do I need a "Rain Collector" to receive from it?  I suppose I also
> need the computer to be outside exposed to the elements -- putting it
> under a brolly would interfere with incoming rain from the cloud ...
> Plus I suppose it would not work very well at all in the desert, but
> downloading would be very high bandwidth in the rainforest (or during
> monsoon season).
>
> :)
>
> --
> The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven
> says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.
>
>
>