[e2e] queriable networks

[Joe Touch]

Ted Faber wrote:
> 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?

Questions that need to be asked of the network: yes. Note that it's not
enough to trust the other party; I have to trust that all parties who
are providing information that might impact my answer. That's why I
don't think this sort of trust ever really exists.

Questions for which the answers can be measured independently (e.g.,
pathchar): no.

Joe


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://www.postel.org/pipermail/end2end-interest/attachments/20051208/45063a89/signature.bin