Death of the Internet, Film at 11

Florian Weimer fw at
Sun Oct 23 10:11:30 UTC 2016

* Keith Medcalf:

> On: Saturday, 22 October, 2016 17:41, Jean-Francois Mezei
> <jfmezei_nanog at> wrote:
>> On 2016-10-22 19:03, Keith Medcalf wrote:
>> > This does not follow and is not a natural consequence of sealing the
>> little buggers up so that they cannot affect the Internet
>> Problem is that many of these gadgets want to be internet connected so
>> mother at work can check on her kids at home, start the cooking, raise
>> thermostat etc.
> This does not require that the devices be open to the Internet, nor
> does it require that they are under the control of an Internet based
> controller.

How would you know?

It is perfectly reasonable to send a notification to a device by
making a TCP connection to it.  This is the way the Internet was
built.  You are not expected to sign a contract with the network
operator for the target device before you can establish a connection
to the device.

The possibility of denial-of-service attacks is not a sufficient
reason to change that model.

More information about the NANOG mailing list