[Info-vax] There are none so blind :-(

[Richard Maher]

Hi Steven,

Look, clearly what's left of the "VMS Community" is in a worse state than
Grampa Simpson's retirement home; one might as well hang up the "Please do
not discuss the outside world" signs and be done with it :-(

But as another exercise in futility. . .

"Steven Underwood" <nobody at spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:O5yDl.16185$Qh6.209 at newsfe14.iad...
>
>
> "Richard Maher" <maher_rj at hotspamnotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:gre36n$6nd$1 at news-01.bur.connect.com.au...
> > Hi,
> >
> > In addition to the Apple, IBM, SUN, Microsoft, and HP-UX support for
IPsec
> > I
> > wanted to see what the level of Linux/IPsec support was out there. Well
as
> > far as Linux goes, I found comprehensive IPsec support has existed for
> > some
> > time on Red Hat, SuSe, and Debian flavours. Are there others I should
look
> > at?
> >
>
> This is a serious question to everyone here though it may sound like a
slam
> to Richard's argument,

The fact that everyone else on the planet has been doing IPsec for years
certainly commands some gravitas and respect. At least from some quaters.

>
> Yes, IPsec exists on these other platforms, but how much is it being
> actually used?  is it really needed?

How much is 64-bit addressing being used? IPv6? Infiniband? The Wheel? Yet
your silence on these issues is deafening.

>
> In the last 12 years, I have been in only 2 different environments and
> neither used IPsec.

Well that's case-closed then! You should be a pollster for the next
elections.

> The Windows environment has been a secondary support
> environment for me in both of these positions, basically keeping things
> running, but being small enough locations that I was included in decision
> making.

Fascinating!

>
8< Snip  - More wikipedia-fodder

> In both of these companies, I have had numerous different vendors
discussing
> our network wants/needs and nobody had ever mentioned IPsec in either
asking
> if we were currently using it or telling us why we would need it (and need
> them to help us implement it to its fullest).  No SOX auditors ever
> mentioned this as a potential problem or even as an improvement to what we
> were doing (and they made LOTS of recommendations).

Steven, I've got no idea what your agenda is here, why you have singled out
IPsec to draw the line in "the evolution of computing" or your "IPsec is by
far and away the one thing we need the least" campaign, but if you could
explain exactly why you'd be happy with writing-off all of the millions
already invested in existing IPsec functionality and isolate VMS servers yet
further then I'd be curious to hear it?

If you could then explain why you're also content with the IPv6 and WSIT
spending then I'd also like to hear that.

But you've not answered one of my questions or acknowledged the strength of
the counter-arguments in previous posts so I'll leave you and all of the
other System Managers here content with their "Well, if we haven't needed it
till now then what the hell could it be good for?" argument. God help us!

They say you get the Govt you deserve, well the VMS User-Base has certainly
got the VMS Management it deserves. The next time you're wondering why they
have just shafted you senseless, it's not just 'cos you let'em; you
pssitively demanded it :-(
>
> Thank you

No, thank you. It's been delightful :-(
>

Regards Richard Maher