Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: end2end? (was: RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...)
From: Adam McKenna <adam-nanog () flounder net>
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:49:26 -0700

On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 07:50:05PM -0400, Andy Dills wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Leo Bicknell esoterically agitated:

It does have some interesting implication as to who can modify data
as well.  If a device in the middle has license to modify data in
the middle of a data stream, what are the limits of that license?
If my service provider uses NAT without my consent can I sue them
for reading/changing my data?  If not, why would I be able to sue
them if they do the same thing to e-mail?  What is the difference?

You can sue whoever you want, for whatever you want, whenever you want.

Can you show damages in the situation of email? Yes. With packets? No. And
before you come back at me with some crazy convoluted contrived scenario,
let's just realize how far off the beaten path we are at this point. If
your ISP is going to force you to use NAT, "against your will", get a new
fricking provider. For that matter, what ISP NATs you against your will?

I've been waiting for an answer to this since the thread started -- but then
I realized that the NAT argument is just a smokescreen which enables Meyer to 
continue his prefix filtering flamewar.  The sooner you all stop paying
attention to him, the better off this list will be.


Adam McKenna <adam () flounder net>   | GPG: 17A4 11F7 5E7E C2E7 08AA
http://flounder.net/publickey.html |      38B0 05D0 8BF7 2C6D 110A

  By Date           By Thread  

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