- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 16:18:12 -0500
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@hsivonen.fi>
- Cc: Public TAG List <www-tag@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <2C5C8370-E078-4798-8027-BD97D59FE8E7@w3.org>
On 2014-12 -11, at 07:46, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@hsivonen.fi> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: >> * The example of a village with poor access (e.g., in Africa) has regularly been >> brought up in the IETF as an example of a population who want shared >> caching, rather than encryption. The (very strong) response from folks >> who >> have actually worked with and surveyed such people has just as regularly >> been that many of these people value security and privacy more. That's interesting. Data? (((The school I remember in Rwanda which ran of one VSAT 128k link I think we just interested in getting some connectivity for their class and caching was crucial. They used a custom router/cache which was designed for that situation. I don't think they were concerned about people spying on or falsifying the wikipedia pages they were reading in the class. But maybe I missed that. Maybe they now have fibre. Or maybe in general the switch from wifi to mobile 3g data where there is not real opportunity for people to push in a community cache. ))) But to argue about this without data is not forward progress. > > Thank you for bringing this up. > > It seems to me that there is a pattern that people find the theory of > forward proxies architecturally appealing and then try to find use > cases that fit the architecture. I don't see a pattern. > The previous hobbyhorse of this kind > was "transcoding proxies". No one had really seen one (*reverse* > proxies and origin servers don't count) or had a personal need for one > but they were believed to exist Over There in Russia and it was > supposedly important to design protocols and formats to cater to them > (even though the more reasonable protocol design choice was for > everyone to use UTF-8 and not transcode anything--and even failing > that, browsers have built-in support for a whole bunch of Cyrillic > legacy encodings, so there is no need for intermediaries to transcode > anyway). People making this argument weren't themselves from Russia, > of course. Hence, "Over There". > > It seems that Africa has taken Russia's place as Over There where > theoretical use cases for the pre-supposed proxy architecture might > lurk. But do you have any more basis for your beliefs than they do for theirs? . > [...] > -- > Henri Sivonen > hsivonen@hsivonen.fi > https://hsivonen.fi/ > >
Received on Friday, 19 December 2014 21:18:14 UTC