[16861] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: link-layer encryptors for Ethernet?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven M. Bellovin)
Wed Feb 9 13:27:32 2005
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@cs.columbia.edu>
To: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Cc: Joseph Tardo <tardo@acm.org>, cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 09 Feb 2005 09:27:26 MST."
<420A39EE.8030700@garlic.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 11:35:19 -0500
In message <420A39EE.8030700@garlic.com>, Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
>the internal network was larger than the arpanet/internet just about the
>whole time up until about mid-85. all the links leaving physical premise
>had to be encrypted ... there was the claim that over half of all
>encrypters in the world were on the internal network (and put at least
>one of the major products/companies into business). lots of random
>comments about about the internal network
>http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#internalnet
>
>small sample posting about the internal net passing 1000 nodes not long
>after internet passed 255 nodes.
>http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm#22
>
>one of the big issues in part of this period was getting encrypters on
>links that cross national boundaries.
>
Yup. Often, large corporations had policies requiring them, because of
how frequently a transoceanic fiber would be cut and the circuits
rerouted to satellite.
--Prof. Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
