🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Nov17.082637.1780@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu> denning@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu writes:
>In article <BxKLDM.Mss@sneaky.lonestar.org>, gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt) writes:
>>>1.  Caller activates call.  All 3 parties generate a random x and
>>>exchange their values y = a^x mod p for some a and p.  All 3 parties
>>>generate the key k in the style of DH but with 3 exponents instead
>>>of 2.
>> 
>> You're proposing enough telephone-company equipment to be involved in
>> EVERY telephone call in progress at once.  This is VERY expensive.  If 
>
>I'm not so sure.  Switches are involved in every call right now.  
>Also, the majority of calls are unlikely to be encrypted and key 
>negotiation only takes  place at the beginning of a call.  But this
>is a good point.
>

I'm afraid that this proposal reflects a naive view of the future of the
communications network. How would such a proposal work with a virtual
private network. How would it work over a private line with compressed
traffic.

Switches may be involved in every call but even today they are not involved
in the setting up of every call. 

I could go on and on about this but I refer the reader to the manyarticles
on the coming broadband network. In such networks bandwidth is reserved and
protocols are negotiated end to end. The telco could not hope to be able
to decipher the control message passing thrugh the bradband pipes.

This is the concern that many have with the FDI digital telephony proposal.
It will force the telecom industry to abandon promising future developments
and in the case of this proposal standard industry technology which is
curreltly widely deployed.
-- 
i.sinature