On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 08:50:52PM +0200, Rado S wrote:
> [...] , or at least the interests of the powers if there can't be
> a 100% safe technical solution (as James requires for client control).

I do not require a 100% safe technical solution for client control.  I
simply do not think client control is important.  I would prefer there
be no client control.  Protocol control is the important barrier.

James Cameron    mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org     http://quozl.netrek.org/