On Tuesday 28 August 2007 01:02, Dean Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 27 Aug 2007, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Basically, because some people are too dense to use IPsec or SSL for traffic they don't want observed, you want to greatly complicate the average home network's design? That they should be more scared of, say, their spouse sniffing their credit card numbers at home than the NSA and FBI tapping their email and web browsing at the CO?
It has nothing to do with IPsec or SSL. Your view of what people do at home is kind of narrow. Some people run businesses out of their house, and some have quite complicated home networks, with wifi for guests and and other parts they don't want guests to get into.
I agree, not all home users have a small flat LAN. I'm personally running a VPN between 2 locations (privately) that are 85km seperated. Concequently I have 3 subnets (location A, WAN and location B). Besides that I have a VPN access when I'm on the road into those as well (currently IPv4 but as soon as I have the time v6). So I guess I'm actually using 4 subnets. I'm currently running my WLAN closed and not open to my guests but if I would open it (which I consider when I have some time to set up a captive portal log-in facility). Then I'd have 6 subnets (the 4 already mentioned + guest WLAN at both locations). I know I'm not the average user and probably more a geek but... And like Dean suggests already, I use crypto for completely different purposes, I don't need to subnet for that. Regards, Marc -- -- This mail is personal -- All statements in this mail are made from my own personal perspective and do not necessarily reflect my employer's opinions or policies.