[e2e] queriable networks

[Ted Faber]

On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 04:40:31PM -0800, Joe Touch wrote:
> Dave Crocker wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >> One place where I depart from a common view of the end to end argument is
> >>  that there are times when it makes sense to actively enquire of the
> >> network and expect the network to make a response that characterizes
> >> itself.
> 
> (responding more to Fred than to Dave, but with Dave's subject thread):
> 
> This presumes two things:
> 
> 1) if you ask the question, you actually want the answer
[snip]
> 2) if you ask the question, you can trust the answer
[snip]

Do you think that the set of queries to "the network" for which the
asker really wants and can trust the answer is empty?

There are certainly lots of ways to go wrong, but it seems that there
are times when an entity knows the right question and knows another
entity that has the information and is trustable, but there's no
protocol to ask the question.  If those cases exist, it seems like it's
worthwhile to be able to ask the question.

-- 
Ted Faber
http://www.isi.edu/~faber           PGP: http://www.isi.edu/~faber/pubkeys.asc
Unexpected attachment on this mail? See http://www.isi.edu/~faber/FAQ.html#SIG
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.postel.org/pipermail/end2end-interest/attachments/20051208/1c76c300/attachment.bin