nanog mailing list archives
Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...)
From: Henry Linneweh <hrlinneweh () sbcglobal net>
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 22:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
if the pro-ported bad guys are so swift why would they use anything packaged anyway? They have engineers and scientific minds in their ranks that understand devices, boards and the likes and could simply create their own data centers and simply use new protocols to communicate over the public lines and not one person would know the difference, all the laws in the world would not stop them, since US law doesn't apply to anyone but US citizens and most other nations could care less about what we imagine, contrive and go into hysterics about. -Henry --- John Curran <jcurran () istaff org> wrote:
At 12:06 AM -0400 6/20/04, Sean Donelan wrote:On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, John Curran wrote:S.2281 takes the middle of the road position inareas such as lawfulintercept, universal service fund, and E911. Ata high-level, thoseVoIP services which offer PSTN interconnection(and thereby look liketraditional phone service in terms ofcapabilities) under S.2281 pick upthe same regulatory requirements.It sounds good, if you assume there will always bea PSTN. But itslike defining the Internet in terms of connectingto the ARPANET. Correct. It's a workable interim measure to continue today's practice while the edge network is transitioning to VoIP. It does not address the more colorful long-term situation that law enforcement will be in shortly with abundant, ad-hoc, encrypted p2p communications.What about Nextel's phone-to-phone talk featurewhich doesn't touchthe PSTN? What about carriers who offer "Free"on-net calling, whichdoesn't connect to the PSTN and off-net calling tocustomers on thePSTN or other carriers. Will the bad guys follow the law, and only conducttheir criminalactivities over services connected to the PSTN?Sean - what alternative position do you propose? /John
Current thread:
- Justice Dept: Wiretaps should apply to Net calls Fergie (Paul Ferguson) (Jun 19)
- S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) John Curran (Jun 19)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) Sean Donelan (Jun 19)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) John Curran (Jun 19)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) Henry Linneweh (Jun 19)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) John Todd (Jun 20)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) John Curran (Jun 20)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) Sean Donelan (Jun 20)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) John Curran (Jun 20)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) Sean Donelan (Jun 20)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) Sean Donelan (Jun 19)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) Owen DeLong (Jun 21)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) John Curran (Jun 21)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) Pete Schroebel (Jun 21)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) Christopher L. Morrow (Jun 21)
- Re: S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) Pete Schroebel (Jun 21)
- S.2281 Hearing (was: Justice Dept: Wiretaps...) John Curran (Jun 19)