[Info-vax] DECserver/LAT across DECnet areas?

[Johnny Billquist]

On 2023-07-24 14:56, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2023-07-23, Scott Dorsey <kludge at panix.com> wrote:
>> Andy Burns  <usenet at andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>> Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is culturally very different than modern systems where everything
>>>> is running IP and only what is on top of TCP or UDP is different.
>>>
>>> We're pretty close to the next stage where everything is running on top
>>> of HTTPS, aren't we?
>>
> 
> Good.

Not.

>> Please don't remind me.  It's a horrible idea to contemplate, isn't it?
> 
>  From a security point of view, it (or something similar) is a really
> good idea.

Have you ever heard of "all eggs in one basket"? It's generally not a 
good idea. When a security issue appears, *everything* is then 
voulnerable. Having multiple solutions, implementations and technologies 
carries a cost, but it also reduces risks in one way. Yes, you might 
have a higher chance of having an exploit, but the consequences are much 
less damaging. And you will always have exploits. And thus, any argument 
about the number of exploits have to acknowledge that first of all, 
there will be exlpoits. So, talking about limiting the damages is the 
more reasonable/interesting thing to do.

Not to mention the overhead of running it all over http. I know that 
there have even been implementations of IP over http...

It's turtles all the way down.

   Johnny