nanog mailing list archives
Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police
From: Adrian Chadd <adrian () creative net au>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 02:00:43 +0800
On Mon, Nov 20, 2000, Roeland Meyer wrote:
The ONLY one that should be even dreaming about doing something like this is the direct upstream to the leaf nodes, and then ONLY with permission. Otherwise, no ports should ever be filtered by any transit provider. By God, we PAY for open pipes and there are standard remedies when we don't get what we pay for.
You know, I *do* believe in unfiltered access to the internet. So would all of you I bet. However, I do not have faith in even a little tiny chunk of the users who have access to the internet to have the slightest inkling of common sense. Yes, I have valid reasons to spoof packets here at home since I have a /24 routed here over a tunnel, but how many users would *you* give access to do this? [1] Now, I took the extra 30 minutes to figure out how to source-route packets in FreeBSD to make my return packets work over this tunnel. Why can't half-duplex satellite providers, to keep this example going, actually implement something similar, rather than requiring providers to spoof source addresses? I'd hate to see the internet dissolve further into having court cases decide what direction the internet takes. 2c, Adrian [1] Well, I *could* argue that since DoS *still* happens .. :-) -- Adrian Chadd "God: Damn! I left pot everywhere! <adrian () creative net au> Now I'll have to create Republicans!" - Bill Hicks
Current thread:
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Christian Kuhtz (Nov 20)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Roeland Meyer (Nov 20)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police Adrian Chadd (Nov 20)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Roeland Meyer (Nov 20)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 20)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police Shawn McMahon (Nov 20)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Roeland Meyer (Nov 20)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Roeland Meyer (Nov 20)
- "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." JIM FLEMING (Nov 20)
- Re: "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." Bora Akyol (Nov 20)
- Re: "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." Joe Abley (Nov 21)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Jason Slagle (Nov 21)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police Stephen Sprunk (Nov 21)
- "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." JIM FLEMING (Nov 20)
(Thread continues...)