Re: Thank you, Comcast.

[Maxwell Cole <mcole.mailinglists () gmail com>]

Thats not really a fair comparison, I think a lot of people have issues with people censoring/controlling/prioritizing 
internet access to make money. Its a somewhat more nuanced conversation when you are talking about doing the same thing 
to prevent abuse. 

Cheers,
Max

> On Feb 26, 2016, at 10:32 AM, James Downs <egon () egon cc> wrote:
>
>
> > On Feb 26, 2016, at 06:31, Keith Medcalf <kmedcalf () dessus com> wrote:
> >
> > ISP's should block nothing, to or from the customer, unless they make it clear *before* selling the service (and 
> > include it in the Terms and Conditions of Service Contract), that they are not selling an Internet connection but 
> > are selling a partially functional Internet connection (or a limited Internet Service), and specifying exactly what 
> > the built-in deficiencies are.
>
> Absolutely. It’s funny that a group that worries about about net neutrality and whinges about T-Mobile’s zero-rating 
> certain video sources is perfectly fine with blindly blocking *ports*, without even understanding if it’s legitimate 
> traffic.
>
> > Deficiencies may include:
> > port/protocol blockage toward the customer (destination blocks)
> > port/protocol blockage toward the internet (source blocks)
> > DNS diddling (filtering of responses, NXDOMAIN redirection/wildcards, etc)
>
> This would be a big reason to point to a different DNS...
>
> > Traffic Shaping/Policing/Congestion policies, inbound and outbound
> >
> > Some ISPs are good at this and provide opt-in/out methods for at least the first three on the list.  Others not so 
> > much.