Re: NEA compelling problem (but no deployment)

[Bernard Aboba <aboba at internaut.com>]

>But I think that's beside the point - the use cases for which we know 
>that NEA may be useful are already compelling enough that we should stop 
>debating whether or not to charter the group and get on with the work.

While I do agree that the *problem* being described is compelling, that 
does not imply that the architecture being described represents a 
workable solution to that problem.  

The solutions that customers are currently deploying tend to be 
considerably simpler and more general than the NEA architecture.  For 
example, few of these solutions rely on EAP, or require forklift
upgrades of routers or switches.  Few involve elaborate "posture 
conversations" on each network access.  Instead, the solutions that 
are being deloyed tend to be based on "appliances" that are 
compatible with any operating system or network infrastructure and 
have negligible impact on the performance of non-infected hosts.  
They are therefore easy to deploy and inexpensive to operate. 

With NEA as with any other Internet technology, performance and 
ease of deployment matter.  Some food for thought:
http://www.itbusinessedge.com/item/?ci=8349




_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf