1995-02-08 - RE: a new way to do anonymity

Header Data

From: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: a807b99e766f26a7e6df00f3054f58004144242abf9b00f4fb4dfc191ec861da
Message ID: <199502081418.GAA23140@largo.remailer.net>
Reply To: <Chameleon.4.01.950207225342.jcorgan@comet.aeinet.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-02-08 14:20:39 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 06:20:39 PST

Raw message

From: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 06:20:39 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: RE: a new way to do anonymity
In-Reply-To: <Chameleon.4.01.950207225342.jcorgan@comet.aeinet.com>
Message-ID: <199502081418.GAA23140@largo.remailer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


   From: Johnathan Corgan <jcorgan@aeinet.com>

   One of the lessons learned in the years-long debate between the
   telco folks pushing synchronous time-division multiplexing point to
   point circuit switches and the data folks pushing variable length
   packet-switched broadcast medium networks is that fixed length
   packets can give you both TDM and statistical multiplexing.

There's an important difference here.  Namely, the telco/ATM folks
were building hardware from scratch and we're not.  We're layering on
top of an existing Internet routing environment.

This doesn't mean that your point is wrong, but that it may no longer
be true when the base layer is IP.  I'm not familiar enough with the
ATM arguments to know whether they're still valid in this other
domain.

Eric





Thread