[e2e] Re: crippled Internet

David P. Reed dpreed at reed.com
Mon Apr 23 19:54:09 PDT 2001

At 03:48 PM 4/23/01 -0700, Fred Baker wrote:
>At 04:10 PM 4/18/2001 -0700, Mike Fisk wrote:
>>Many folks have suggested that the security/quality of software won't be
>>improved until the financial effects of poor quality software are felt by
>they're felt now. It's not that they need to be felt by customers, it's 
>that an alternative has to be demonstrated to them to exist which is only 
>available if they pay for it, and which they are willing to pay for. Their 
>sense now tends to be that high quality QoS and security should be part of 
>the package at the price they are paying now, and the lack is a bug which 
>the vendor should fix.

When the vendor can do so, who can disagree?  However, since poor QoS and 
security flaws must be solved more by user deployment choices than by 
vendors fixing bugs, users are fooling themselves to think that the vendor 
alone can do this.

Adequate provisioning goes a long way to fixing QoS, and adequate use of 
encryption and key distribution mechanisms already available (SSL, PGP) go 
a long way toward security.  Neither is deployed.

- David
WWW Page: http://www.reed.com/dpr.html

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list