[114277] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Minnesota to block online gambling sites?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Martin Hannigan)
Tue May 5 14:18:58 2009
In-Reply-To: <9BCDA840-484F-40C7-94B7-3D0EE2962F89@delong.com>
Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 14:18:42 -0400
From: Martin Hannigan <martin@theicelandguy.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
>From a strictly operational perspective:
The only concern that I had with that request was with the v4 address
blocking. That ought to be rethought in the grand scheme of things i.e. v4
exhaustion. There's a reasonable case to make regarding not tainting hosts
or specific blocks in this manner. Creating "less usable" v4 resources as we
approach exhaustion is not helpful, IMHO.
Best Regards,
Martin
> 2009/5/4 John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>:
>>
>>> Not withstanding the legality of such an order, how would one
>>>> operationally enforce that order?
>>>>
>>>
>>> The order has a list of IP addresses, so I expect the ISPs will just
>>> block those IPs in routers somewhere.
>>>
>>> Since offshore online gambling is equally illegal everywhere in the
>>> U.S., the ISPs have little reason to limit the block to Minnesota
>>> customers, giving them a lot of latitude in where they implement the
>>> block.
>>>
>>
--
Martin Hannigan martin@theicelandguy.com
p: +16178216079
Power, Network, and Costs Consulting for Iceland Datacenters and Occupants
