nanog mailing list archives
Re: Horrible Service Agreements
From: Dean Anderson <dean () av8 com>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 18:53:08 -0500
At 4:32 PM -0500 12/1/97, Vadim Antonov wrote:
Cryptography can be used to produce non-transferrable keys allowing some party to send message to a particular recipient. Messages can include "right to respond" keys. The problem with authenticated messaging is how to send a message
Wow! What a heavy-handed technological alternative to the delete key.
I was always saying that Internet is quite a step forward in promoting a right to speak. Unfortunately as-is it is very bad at promoting the right not to listen.
I disagree. The right not to listen is appropriately exercised by the delete key. What has been discussed are means to suppress speech by others. The right to respond? And some people don't have such a right? Sounds like some communist countries that don't exist anymore. Didn't that cause riots, wars, insurrection, mass killing, and other bad things? Usenet perfected the solution to this problem many years ago: kill files, and personal filters. Of course, that is my point: we have already been through these problems years ago, and found acceptable technical solutions for them. But people insist on getting their underwear in a bunch regarding spam, and inventing new solutions to old problems. This may be too political for continued discussion on nanog. If people want to continue, will the next respondent add the relevant parties to the cc list and remove nanog? Also, I'm very interested in hard numbers on: T1, or T3 spam disconnects made (not just complaints made) Revenue forfeited due to these disconnects Information on how many spam factories there were, and what they are doing now. Did they quit, go somewhere else? They must have netly employees who were known and can be located again. Have any *custoemrs* disconnected from you due to spam? This thread started over the provision in a contract to disconnect the customer. Has this been used in reverse to get out of a contract with a provider? Also, is anyone even considering breaking peering agreements with uplink spam sources. (AGIS comes to mind, sorry AGIS). Please email me privately. Thanks --Dean ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean () av8 com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Current thread:
- Re: Horrible Service Agreements Dean Anderson (Dec 01)
- Re: Horrible Service Agreements Vadim Antonov (Dec 01)
- Re: Horrible Service Agreements Dean Anderson (Dec 01)
- Re: Horrible Service Agreements John R. Levine (Dec 02)
- Re: Horrible Service Agreements Vadim Antonov (Dec 01)
- Re: spam, was Horrible Service Agreements John R Levine (Dec 01)
- Re: spam, was Horrible Service Agreements Root (Dec 01)
- Re: Horrible Service Agreements Adrian Chadd (Dec 01)
- Re: Horrible Service Agreements Vadim Antonov (Dec 01)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Horrible Service Agreements Brian Horakh (Dec 02)
- Re: Horrible Service Agreements Adrian Chadd (Dec 02)
- Re: Horrible Service Agreements Brian Horakh (Dec 02)