Re: CDT Comments on OPES

["Hilarie Orman" <HORMAN@xxxxxxxxxx>]

It is possible to define formal semantics for data integrity in the
OPES model and implement them in a verifiable manner, overlay
network or not.

Hilarie

>>> "Ian Cooper" <icooper@xxxxxxxxxxx> 08/10/01 01:59AM >>>
At 15:42 8/9/2001 -0600, Hilarie Orman wrote:

>OPES will increase the integrity of content delivery over what is
>available today.

I agree to some extent, but as I've mentioned before (and Ted reiterated in 
the meeting on Tuesday) there are some issues with such an "overlay 
network" that might reduce the integrity.

>It is of only academic interest to contrast
>a pure end-to-end world against a world with OPES.

I'm not so sure.  As I've stated before, I have some serious concerns in 
failover and roaming-user conditions.  (These are not limited to OPES, 
admittedly.)

>   As another
>purely academic exercise, contrast a pure voice switching
>model against the Internet.  The Internet offers many opportunities
>for traffic monitoring, substitution, and malicious intervention that
>the phone system did and does not.  Whether or not the benefits
>outweighed the risks was not evident a priori; in the case of OPES,
>you cannot make such an evaluation simply by pointing out risks
>that are already there without OPES and claiming that OPES somehow
>makes them worse.

True, though the evaluation also acknowledges that the OPES work is likely 
to be developed outside IETF (if a WG isn't formed here) anyway.  I think 
the point is whether IETF is seen to "sanction" such work.  I don't have 
any particularly strong feelings either way on that point.