[91241] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Sitefinder II, the sequel...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Tue Jul 11 00:01:51 2006
In-Reply-To: <20060710234002.132160f0.smb@cs.columbia.edu>
Cc: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 00:00:32 -0400
To: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Jul 10, 2006, at 11:40 PM, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
> I'll demur --- I don't much like it, for several reasons.
[SNIP - several good points.]
> Yes, this is better than Sitefinder, because it's not forced on the
> entire
> Internet. However, it shares many of the same flaws.
I'm not going to use the service either, but for different reasons
than you state. And it does have "many of the same flaws" as
Sitefinder.
But Sitefinder had only one fatal flaw: The Lack Of Choice.
Obviously that flaw is not shared.
Of course, everyone should feel free to espouse their opinions on the
service, and use it or not, and try to persuade others to use it or
not. But just like any other service, software, protocol, or other
_optional_ choice in running your network (or home computer), we will
just have to let the market decide. Chances are, there's enough
Internet to go around for everyone, whether they use the service or not.
--
TTFN,
patrick
