1. Home
  2. General Telecommunications Forum
  3. R.I.P. Patrick Townson, September 24, 1942 - August 9, 2014

R.I.P. Patrick Townson, September 24, 1942 - August 9, 2014

I just returned from a brief vacation, and read an email from Mike Sandman that told me Patrick Townson has been gathered up.

There is an obituary online, but it's not very informative, and I've written to Pat's brother to ask for more information. The URL is

formatting link
.

I had talked to Pat, on and off, since his second stroke. The last time was very early this year: I'm sorry to say that I realized at that time that Pat was no longer in touch with his surroundings, and that I'd never get to ask him to set out the details of his life and times that he wanted to be remembered for.

I'd like to write a better story about Pat than what's availalbe now, so anyone with details on his education, life, relationships, accomplishments, and family is welcome to send them to my personal address.

Thanks in advance.

Bill

Reply to
Bill Horne
Loading thread data ...

Bill Horne wrote in :

I think the Telecom Digest is one of Pat's biggest and longest-running accomplishments. The biggest compliment for this that I know can be found at

formatting link

Tim Berners-Lee forwarding a suggestion to make the telecom digest available on the web in order to *promote the web*.

Koos

Reply to
Koos van den Hout

This .signature hit a bit of a raw nerve today. I thought I was ready to support IPv6 years ago. Then along came "privacy" addresses and threw all of that right out the window. I don't want to repeat my rant here, so please see my blog post about why IPv6 as currently specified and implemented is unsuitable for use on anything but small or very tightly controlled networks:

Everything I write about could be fixed -- indeed, could have been prevented -- but the software vendors who decided that turning on "privacy" addresses would make it seem as if they were doing a good thing should have talked with the network hardware vendors (who would have told them that this was insane). We'll probably end up using DHCPv6 (and turning on DHCP snooping to block clients that *don't* use a DHCP-assigned IPv6 address) but we don't yet have the ability to do that.

A reasonable alternative to "privacy" addresses -- depending on the threat model -- would be either Cryptographically Generated Addresses or generating the interface ID as a 62-bit truncated hash of (prefix, MAC-48) rather than a random number, so that it would at least be stable and traceable within the domain of a single network operator.

-GAWollman

Reply to
Garrett Wollman

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.