[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: CAP & Latency
One more thing I forgot to include yesterday...
>I think of this like EMAIL. I do not know your physical address.
>My real intranet address is droyer@<some hidden host>.software.com.
>Yet Doug.Royer@Software.com gets to me. Same issue.
Another way its is NOT like eMail is that in eMail routing, the only address that gets rewritten is the destination one (from Doug.Royer@Software.com to droyer@<hidden host>.software.com). The _sending_ address is not rewritten en route. You wont find any (non-hostile) SMTP mail systems that say "Hey, this is from bkahn@<another hidden host>.iris.com so lets readdress it for him as Bruce_Kahn@iris.com". You may find this behaviour in an SMTP Gateway between SMTP and another mail environment but in that case they are more than likely going to be in the return path; unlike the scenario so far.
WRT the flow:
> CUA-1
> |
> |
> CS-1
> |
> |
> Company-1 firewall (no CAP access from outside)
> ^
> |
> v
> Company-2 firewall (no CAP access from outside)
> |
> |
> CUA-2
For the inter company email to work they MUST allow outside SMTP access. Since SMTP is fairly well defined there are fairly straightforward ways of sending email in and out w/o much risk of security breaches. If C&S is to target the same penetration as email then CAP will need to be permitted in much the same way. Otherwise the comparison to email in this scenario is meaningless.
One of our goals in designing CAP should be to make its adoption by companies an easy choice. One way to do this is to make it something they can adopt w/o risking their intranet or their internal systems and data. But this digresses from the case at hand...
Bruce
===========================================================================
Bruce Kahn INet: Bruce_Kahn@iris.com
Iris Associates Phone: 978.392.5335
Westford, MA, USA 01886 FAX: and nothing but the FAX...
Standard disclaimers apply, even where prohibited by law...