This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/ripe-atlas@ripe.net/
[atlas] Proposal: Remove support for non-public measurements [ONLY-PUBLIC]
- Previous message (by thread): [atlas] Proposal: Remove support for non-public measurements [ONLY-PUBLIC]
- Next message (by thread): [atlas] Proposal: Remove support for non-public measurements [ONLY-PUBLIC]
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Stephane Bortzmeyer
bortzmeyer at nic.fr
Thu Dec 29 15:26:28 CET 2022
On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 02:57:40PM -0800, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote a message of 12 lines which said: > i do not understand the big fuss here. so a teensie fraction of > probes are not public. big deal. Apparently, the problem is that the cost of private measurements is not zero: it makes the Atlas backend code much more complex, with added security issues (ensuring that the private measurementrs stay private). I'm sure we all agree that complexity is something to be reduced. Also, this is not just operators vs. researchers. We are operator (.fr name registry) and we never use private measurements.
- Previous message (by thread): [atlas] Proposal: Remove support for non-public measurements [ONLY-PUBLIC]
- Next message (by thread): [atlas] Proposal: Remove support for non-public measurements [ONLY-PUBLIC]
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]