| To: | "Hans Steegers" <hans,AT,steegers,DOT,nl> |
| Subject: | Re: Up-to-date versions of CIPE/CIPEX. |
| From: | "Dick St.Peters" <stpeters,AT,netheaven,DOT,com> |
| Date: | Thu, 4 Jan 2007 18:33:43 -0500 |
| Cc: | "CIPE-list" <cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de> |
| Dkim-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; c=nowsp; d=netheaven.com; s=saint; t=1167953623; h=X-DomainKeys: DomainKey-Signature:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject: In-Reply-To:References:X-Mailer; b=X0TJ72Hb1kRPC1fjp7cBQEJjKSGVJuEvYWs7YOfbrcy7ZM48P87TFYUoUH0mNyZ9FsLCCBxpa59jKi9n+tbuYw== |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; s=saint; d=netheaven.com; c=nofws; q=dns;h=received:message-id:date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer;b=N/5kro7GMj2ESeL4acLbYr9wa219oBBkaCDcwh8+PBZu2JpbOmmI2Kwylo+uoPXOij1ime+MVmusZZs7PYpMxg== |
| In-reply-to: | <002101c73004$3c204a20$d620a8c0@pcw_hans.hnsasd.lan> |
| References: | <002101c73004$3c204a20$d620a8c0@pcw_hans.hnsasd.lan> |
Hans Steegers writes: > I am amazed so many undertakers are still > lurking this list. > Many of them were very active in the Gutmann > security discussion (2003). > None of them contributed anything to the > development of CIPE. Hmmm ... I've kept quiet this go around so far, but I'd qualify as an "undertaker" who still lurks here and who did contribute a little ... I wrote and made available by ftp patches that got a few cipe people through the kernel api changes around kernel versions 2.6.10 to 2.6.14. (Somebody even downloaded my 2.6.14 patch this morning.) I stopped developing patches because A) my last cipe user canceled his account, and B) people like Hans were doing a better job anyway. I am curious, though, what the rationale is for carrying on with cipe or cipe-derived development or use. As someone with a lot of experience with both cipe and OpenVPN, the only advantage I can think of for cipe is that it was there when we needed it. That was monumental at the time, and cipe deserves a shining place of honor in the history of Linux - and, for that matter, in the history of computing, but the operative word is "history". I wrote my first computer program in 1964 (!), and in the many years since then I've had to learn to recognize when it was time to let treasured things go. A few years ago I was actively promoting cipe and selling cipe-based tunnels. Today, I would no more recommend using cipe than I would using 029's. (For the youngsters out there, IBM 029's were the typewriter-like machines that punched the holes in IBM cards.) Perhaps Hans can give a good reason for continuing cipe, but so far I haven't seen one. As an elderly geek who has been replaced by younger blood, I can assert there is no loss of honor in being replaced. Those who replaced me will achieve more not because they are inherently better but because they have better stuff to build upon. So it is with OpenVPN. It builds upon a base that simply wasn't there when cipe was in its glory. By utilizing what is available now, OpenVPN can and does achieve things cipe cannot. So I would say it is time to "let go" of cipe and to remember it as it was when it was the only act in town. Trying to keep it going when there is no good reason to do so risks having it remembered not as something grand but as something that couldn't keep up. It deserves having its place of honor in history preserved. -- Dick St.Peters, stpeters,AT,NetHeaven,DOT,com Gatekeeper, NetHeaven, Saratoga Springs, NY