Re: baseline CPIM security
Dave Crocker <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.impp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
At 06:39 PM 10/5/2002 -0400, Derek Atkins wrote: >No, that is not at all what we're talking about. What we're talking >about _IS_ more like email than IP, except we want to meet some >end-to-end security requirements which email does not. Derek, I am at a loss to think of how to explain some as basic as the fact that your "except" utterly and completely defeats the idea of interconnecting independent technology systems. > > Gatewaying is what is done between Internet Mail and X.400, for > > example. Two, independent and complete systems. > >Right, and if this particular email was gatewayed to an X.400 system, >the CONTENT (meaning the section that begins "Dave Crocker <...> >writes:" and ends with "www.ihtfp.com" is transmitted without changes. >I could use PGP and encrypt this message content, and again the >gateway would _still work_. 1. Headers are part of content. 2. The requirement includes direct MIME support by the end systems. That's not gatewaying. That's just plain old relaying. >In other words, SIP or APEX or whatever provides it's envelope and >transport mechanism and we gateway from one to another. Enveloping is what relay systems do. Translation is what gateways do. Again: the difference is fundamental. The current effort is seeking to define a single global service, rather than to interconnect a set of independent services. d/ ---------- Dave Crocker <mailto:[email protected]> TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com> tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850 [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]