nanog mailing list archives
Re: ORBS block
From: Derek Balling <dredd () megacity org>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 11:52:35 -0800
At 11:47 AM 12/18/99 -0800, I Am Not An Isp wrote:
>Perhaps you should re-read RFC 1123 #5.2.5, keeping in mind that it is >within my right as the owner of the system in question to ignore any >given part of an RFC where I deem it necessary to do so.I find it amusing Mr. Woods believes he can do as he pleases with his mail server, but network operators are not allowed to do as they please with their networks.
I think (as I interpret the discussion) it is this way: Anyone can do whatever he wants with his/her mail server.The Network Operator can do whatever he wants with his network, BUT if the network provider has downstream customers, paying for internet connectivity, and the operator filters out part of that connectivity, then the operator has voided the contract (by filtering out a portion of the network the downstream may consider "important") in a manner that allows the downstream to bail out of any such contract. (I think such a filter could be considered "materially altering the service provided" although IANAL).
I think that's the gist of things from what I've seen... D
Current thread:
- ORBS block Dean Anderson (Dec 16)
- RE: ORBS block Rubens Kuhl Jr. (Dec 16)
- Re: ORBS block Greg A. Woods (Dec 16)
- Re: ORBS block Tim Wolfe (Dec 17)
- Re: ORBS block Alex P. Rudnev (Dec 17)
- Re: ORBS block Paul Vixie (Dec 17)
- Re: ORBS block Greg A. Woods (Dec 17)
- Re: ORBS block Daniel Senie (Dec 17)
- Re: ORBS block Greg A. Woods (Dec 17)
- Re: ORBS block I Am Not An Isp (Dec 18)
- Re: ORBS block Derek Balling (Dec 18)
- Re: ORBS block J.D. Falk (Dec 18)
- Re: ORBS block Paul Vixie (Dec 18)
- Re: ORBS block Tim Wolfe (Dec 17)
- Re: ORBS block Alex Kamantauskas (Dec 17)
- Re: ORBS block Tim Wolfe (Dec 17)
- Re: ORBS block Greg A. Woods (Dec 17)