[Dundi] Looking Glass

[Scott Wolf]

If a person was able to look up a number i publish into the peering 
network, would that not be enough evidence they have executed the GPA. I 
see no other way they could get ahold of the current rotating key 
without a GPA in place with some member.

Scott Wolf

Ed Guy wrote:

>Since the GPA is executed (and terminated) on a pairwise basis,
>the only way one knows that another node is in the trust group
>is to actually traverse the peers on a hop-by-hop basis.
>
>For instance, FWD has not executed a GPA with N2Net, but
>I can get their node information from netmonks which presumably
>has executed the GPA with both of us.  The moment the link
>between netmonks and N2Net goes down, FWD does not know if the GPA
>has been terminated or if there is a network problem.
>
>There were also a couple nodes on the map that were in their own
>partition.  While they were reporting e164-group data to netmonks,
>they probably hadn't executed the GPA with anyone.
>
>Bottom line: for netmonks to release any data obtained from
>the e164/dundi-trustgroup,  they must release it through an entity
>with which they have an active GPA.   (The dundi protocol itself
>would be a great way to transmit this data.)
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: dundi-bounces at lists.digium.com
>[mailto:dundi-bounces at lists.digium.com]On Behalf Of Mark Spencer
>Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 1:38 AM
>To: Distributed Universal Number Discovery
>Subject: RE: [Dundi] Looking Glass
>
>
>  
>
>>is a dim one with no such way to monitor, test and spot problems in the
>>network DUNDi+GPA will fail.  You yourself said DUNDi would either be a
>>    
>>
>big
>  
>
>>success or a huge flop.   The internet suffers the same issues... IP
>>addresses, whois records and websites.  I don't see any difference in this
>>vs call routing.  Anyway that's my two cents.
>>    
>>
>
>You can test and spot problems in a more controlled way, we just have to
>determine what it is.  It's not that the tool is bad, it's that it's
>uncontrolled.  What can be done unauthenticated needs to be decided and
>that term "specific", ironically, made more specific.
>
>Mark
>_______________________________________________
>Dundi mailing list
>Dundi at lists.digium.com
>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/dundi
>
>_______________________________________________
>Dundi mailing list
>Dundi at lists.digium.com
>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/dundi
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/dundi/attachments/20041029/a609e018/attachment.html