Re: [Re: Abstract of proposed Internet Draft for Best Current Practice (please comment)]

[Joshua Smith <joshua.ej.smith () usa net>]

building on andy's comments:

is there a forthcoming section on criterium for demonstrating reformation
by the sp and/or 'offending' user?  without it, you will leave it up to
individuals, which will cause inconsistancies.

the proposal does not take in to account the global differences in sp
business models or ideals.  are the same standards to be applied to
developing countries, or will they have a less rigorous set of criteria,
a la current environment policies?

if there were 1000 compromised nodes that took place in a ddos, would you
accept the larger dos caused by blacklisting those networks/hosts?  how
long would the sp's be expected to shoulder the 'collateral damage'
caused by the blacklisting (see first question)?  suppose that the next
day, 500 nodes took place in another ddos, the policy imposed dos becomes
even larger.  a skillful hacker could potentially cause a larger, and
longer lasting dos.

legislating morality does not work (think of the 'drug war' in america).
you cannot correct social ills with a purely technical solution.

my $0.02 usd

joshua  


Andy Dills <andy () xecu net> wrote:
> Some comments, after reading the draft:
>
> Under 2.1, Form of Practice, where you finally talk about what it is
> you're propsing:
>
> "The withdrawal of IR (use of blocklists, cancellation of routing,
> withdrawal of IP addresses and domain names) may in its early months of
> adoption split the Internet into oceans of purity and islands of
> pollution.  As withdrawal expands, polluters will be pushed into ever
> smaller and less connected domains, which grow ever more blocked. This
> cumulative process will end quickly, with residual polluted islands
> populated by those lacking a need to communicate with oceans of purity."
>
>
> That's the primary flaw. This will never get implemented due to the
> cavalier attitude towards collateral damage.
>
> Like you said, you need everybody to jump at the same time. Unfortunately,
> there is almost zero chance of that happening. Hell, I seriously doubt
> that IPv6 will ever replace IPv4 (at least until we truly run out of
> address space...which is looking less likely with time). To ostracize
> those who disagree by lableing them abuse-supporters is to diminish your
> chances even further. You'll end up with an island of purity in the middle
> of an ocean of pollution..."and the cumulative process will end quickly"
> when your customers come to your NOC with pitchforks and shotguns. In the
> end, we're here to serve the customer, not the other way around.
>
>
> Remember, it's a fine line. The network operators don't advocate
> abuse; the business end of cash-desperate networks are the driving
> force in this industry, not us.
>
> Andy
>
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Andy Dills                              301-682-9972
> Xecunet, LLC                            www.xecu.net
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Dialup * Webhosting * E-Commerce * High-Speed Access



"Walk with me through the Universe,
 And along the way see how all of us are Connected.
 Feast the eyes of your Soul,
 On the Love that abounds.
 In all places at once, seemingly endless,
 Like your own existence."
     - Stephen Hawking -