Text 25928, 179 rader
Skriven 2006-02-25 10:46:00 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
  Kommentar till text 25840 av Dale Shipp (1:261/1466.0)
Ärende: Elist mergers
=====================
 >>   My choice and the choice of more than 400 other moderators
 >> who choose to enter information about their echos there

 MVDV>> We don't really know if they all made a free choice do we?

 >    They had multiple choices -- they could have sent their
 > listings to Peter, they could have sent their listings to Thom
 > (as most did), they could have sent their listings to others who
 > were offering the service, or they could have not bothered to
 > send a listing to anyone.

But only one of those choices - sending it to Thom - would have satisfied the
requirement that it must be listed in the Z1 e-list in order to be carried by
the Z1 backbone.

 MVDV>> After all you guys have been telling us for years that
 MVDV>> unlisted echos would be taken off the Z1 backbone. There is
 MVDV>> a disticnt possibility that many moderators only listed
 MVDV>> their echos because they felt they had no choice.

 >   While I will easily grant you that they felt that they had
 > to list their echos onto whatever Elist the distribution systems
 > recognized, that was not Thom's list until *AFTER*

While it may be that it wasn't always Thom's list that was "the recognoised
list" it is sure is now, and so the question of freedom of choice regarding the
moderators there are in that list now, surely applies.

 >>    Personally, I think that such a desire is overkill.

 MVDV>> I don't. If I have to wait a month to get to know who the
 MVDV>> moderator of an echo is, I may as well wait for the monthly
 MVDV>> rules.

 >   See above.  If you really want to know what is on the
 > database *now*, then send it a query to ask it.

Which in NOT possible with as multiple lists that are only synchronised once a
month.

 MVDV>>> NOW, not a month ago. An out of date list is totally
 MVDV>>> useless. 48 hour is the maximum I would consider acceptable.
 >
 >>   You are posturing for effect, and your stated expectation is
 >>   unreasonable.

 MVDV>> Then let me tell you that the one and only instance where I
 MVDV>> thought I migh have some use for the echolist, I was put on
 MVDV>> the wrong foot because the informatio was out of date
 MVDV>> without me being aware of it.

 >   If you are talking about the Elist that Thom maintains, then
 > you could have gotten the information which was correct as of
 > the day you wanted it.

Had I been aware of it, yes. You are missing the point however: the point being
that the list I was using was useless because the information was outdated by
up to a month.


 >> Do you insist that the telephone company send you an
 >>   updated phone book every week?

 MVDV>> No, but I do require that they offer an alternative to get
 MVDV>> up to date information. And they do, I can call the

 >    As does the Elist that Thom maintains.

The synchronised lists of Thom and Peter that the Z1 sysops wanted could not
have provided that service.

 MVDV>> directory information service. And since a decade or so I
 MVDV>> can consult the on-line telephone directory.

 >   As you could do with the Elist that Thom maintains.

But not with a set of zonal lists synchronised only once a month.

 MVDV>> Peter Witschi offered the service of requesting an up to date list.
 >
 >   As does Thom.

See above.

 MVDV>> The Z2 community could have appointed or elected a successor.

 >    As the policy you keep saying is in effect in zone 2 states
 > should have been done.

Your interpretation. Mine says different.

Whatever way, the Z2 community decides not to appoint a successor and that was
the end of the official Z2 echolist.

That does NOT mean that Thom's list gets promoted from Z1 e-list to global
list. It still remains the Z1 e-list.

 MVDV>> What is needed is that you can SEND encryoted mail. You can
 MVDV>> send encrypted mal to me. See above.

 >   For one who keeps insisting that you have to be shown direct
 > evidence before you will believe anything, you certainly seem
 > reluctant to provide any to support the positions that you take.

What more is there to prove? I have told you how you can send encrypted netmail
to me and you confirmed that that should work. What more do you want?

 MVDV>> Anyway, coming to think of it: to update the echolist in a secure way,
 MVDV>> it is  not needed to encrypt the entire message. All that is
 MVDV>> needed is to encrypt the password. As the password already
 MVDV>> is a meaningless string, it would merely mean that it would
 MVDV>> be replaced y another string just as meaningless with the
 MVDV>> difference that the "password" that is now in the masssage
 MVDV>> is no longer sufficient to get the update processed. It
 MVDV>> also requires the key, which is only known to the moderator
 MVDV>> and the echolist keeper. If a router does not object to a
 MVDV>> message containing a password of "XyZzy", why would he
 MVDV>> object if it was replaced by "A4fJq5"?

 >   So you would have the Elist Keeper maintain a separate key
 > for every moderator who wants to send him a listing?  Rather
 > clumsy, and an extra burden.

Just one extra item on the dozen or so that the e-list keeper maintains for
every moderator. I see no problem if the e-list keeper sees no problem.

 MVDV>> My point is that there are many solutions for the cost problem, But
 MVDV>> you do  not want to hear it, you find excuses for rejection. All

 >    I am not looking for excuses.  I gave you the reasons that
 > existed back then.

Which I think were excuse. There were alternatives and I gave you some which
would not have involved any extra cost. But you reject all except the one that
involves a Z1 e-list keeper.

 MVDV>> you want to hear about is a solution where the list is NOT
 MVDV>> in the hands of a Z2 e-list keeper.

 >   I had no objection to there being an Elist keeper in zone 2.

Yeah, as long as he/she was not the only one and Z1 had their own...

 >>>  Never mind, telling me how you would encrypt it in a manner that
 >>> would allow me to decrypt it.

 MVDV>>> There are programmes for that. Not more difficuolt to set
 MVDV>>> up than the stuff needed to maintain an e-list.

 >   So you are attempting to tell me that setting up a secure
 > encryption and key distribution system is not difficult?  Trust me,

I never trust people who say "trust me".

 >>    So tell us all how you would set it up.  Don't duck the question.

 MVDV>> I am not going to write a tutorial on PGP. That would be

 >    Don't need a tutorial on PGP.  Send me your PGP key and
 > I'll try to see if my uplink will accept an encrypted netmail
 > for you. You can use netmail or you can use the email address below.

You should have my key by now.

 MVDV>> reinventing the wheel. The information is freely available
 MVDV>> at various places. PGP is freeware. I can make it
 MVDV>> requestable from my system too if you want.

 >   No need.  I've had it on my home computers for years, and
 > known about and understood the algorithms it uses for decades.

So your were just kicking up dust and trying  to get me to do some needless
work when you challenged me to explain how a message should be encrypted. Good
to know you employ such tactics.

Cheers, Michiel

--- Buy Danish
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)