[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Blockchain and Networking
- Subject: Blockchain and Networking
- From: denys at visp.net.lb (Denys Fedoryshchenko)
- Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2018 10:57:57 +0200
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]>
Each offsite copy of git repository will give alert then, as all
hashes in chain changed at some moment.
Same principle as blockchain.
On 2018-01-08 09:54, tglassey at earthlink.net wrote:
> Uh since MITM Bill perk of custody is key.
> Sent from my HTC
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "Denys Fedoryshchenko" <denys at visp.net.lb>
> To: <nanog at nanog.org>
> Subject: Blockchain and Networking
> Date: Mon, Jan 8, 2018 10:03
> On 2018-01-08 08:59, Peter Kristolaitis wrote:
>> On 2018-01-08 12:52 AM, William Herrin wrote:
>>> I'm having trouble envisioning a scenario where blockchain does
> that >> any
>>> better than plain old PKI.
>>> >> Blockchain is great at proving chain of custody, but when do you
> need >> to do
>>> that in computer networking?
>>> >> Regards,
>>> Bill Herrin
>> > There's probably some potential in using a blockchain for things
>> configuration management. You can authenticate who made what change
>> and when (granted, we can kinda-sorta do this already with the
>> authentication and logging mechanisms, but the blockchain is an
>> immutable, permanent record inherently required for the system to
>> at all).
>> > That immutable, sequenced chain of events would let you do things
>> "make my test environment look like production did last Thursday at
>> 9AM" trivially by reading the blockchain up until that timestamp,
>> running a fork of the chain for the new test environment to track
>> own changes during testing.
>> > Or when you know you did something 2 months ago for client A, and
>> need your new NOC guy to now do it for client B -- the blockchain
>> becomes the documentation of what was done.
>> > We can build all of the above in other ways today, of course. But
>> there's certainly something to be said for a vendor-supported
>> that is inherent in the platform and requires no additional
>> infrastructure. Whether or not that's worth the complexities of
>> managing a blockchain on networking devices is, perhaps, a whole
>> discussion. :)
>> > - Peter
> Why to reinvent git? :)
> Lot of tools available also, to see diff on git commits, to see who
> did commit, and what exactly he changed.
> (it is possible to cryptographically sign commits, as well, and yes,
> they are chain signed, as "blockchain")