Text 303, 46 rader
Skriven 2005-05-14 15:54:38 av val khokhlov (2:463/180)
    Kommentar till text 301 av Peter Knapper (3:772/1.10)
Ärende: Ballot form
===================
  Greetings, Peter!

14 May 05 22:39, Peter Knapper wrote to Val Khokhlov:

 PK> While I can see the advantage of this, in reality it has nothing to do
 PK> with the transport of Mail, and Fidonet (or the FTSC) should stay
 PK> completely away from that one...
        not exactly so. new storage might lead to some changes for
packet/message format. i was told recently someone invented pkt2000 format, for
example. but being a husky and binkd developer, i can say that i'm not going to
implement pkt2000 just because it exists. i don't see any changes in fidonet
technology for last... 8 years (after binkp), which may lead to new pkt format
        anyway, it's too early to speak about standards :) we need to create
software first.

 vk>> 2) routing automation,
 PK> This would have been nice 10 years ago, but with so many nodes moving to
 PK> IP connectivity, point-to-point traffic is becoming very much the norm,
        you see, p2p in fidonet is not-so-desirable because there're no
effective auth schemes. with password auth you can't do p2p (well, you need to
specify password for each link). so, in order to use p2p we need some pka
scheme ([open]ssl seems reasonable to me).
        but it's for ip-nodes. for pstn, routing is rather big problem in large
networks. there's software for routing automation (e.g. safrouter), but i don't
know any good way to make routing fully automatic (which includes creating
routing maps, distributing and using them)

 PK> Yes to public-key for session/pkt traffic,
        securing traffic is a minor feature. the main advancement is validating
a remote system. with node's certificates and revocation lists we can
effectively use p2p connections.

 PK> but digital signatures for messages... again this is not something to do
 PK> with Fidonet or mail transport.
        one can sign his messages with pgp/gnupg now. it's not a fidonet issue.
the fidonet problem is we don't have authoritative source for sender's address.
origin can have any value. msgid isn't a source at all. path has only 2d
address. for netmail we do have some sources, but they are rather confusing now
        but once again i want to say - i don't mean creating proposals before
software, of course.

  Good luck!
             val

--- System uptime: 23 days, 18 hours, 23 minutes, 10 seconds
 * Origin: ...Ivory toweR... (2:463/180)