Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Legislative Relief - was Re: Motion for a new POST NSF
From: bmanning () ISI EDU
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 13:20:28 -0700 (PDT)

If you can propose a solution which does not imply:

      ...imaginary technology to intuit a commercial message from
      its content  (can anyone say "content based routing"? ;)

      ...making the management of the affected resources more 
      rigorous than current practice

      ...punishing the ISP for the actions of its customers

      ...complex or impossible deployment issues

      ...added administrative cost

I and many others would LOVE to hear about it.

I am the first to agree with Shakespere on the value of certain 
members of the legal profession.

This time, however, I do not see any recourse.  Do you?


Lawyers and Law imply the last four of your list of five.  Do you really 
wish to have the US legal system ham-string the growth of the Internet?

Has -anyone- looked at RFC 1746 recently?   If ISP's do not review this
RFC and build reasonable polices as a result, then thier peers should
put them out of buisness as a matter of self preservation.  There is zero
need to try and have the law do things to people who will not help themselves.
If you get undesireable content, block routes to the offending party and
take your business elsewhere.

-- 
--bill


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]
AlienVault