[116237] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Hiers, David)
Mon Jul 27 11:24:28 2009
From: "Hiers, David" <David_Hiers@adp.com>
To: "nanog - n. am. network ops group list" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 10:22:06 -0500
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0907270946380.4187@soloth.lewis.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I"m not a lawyer, but I think that the argument goes something like this.=
=2E.
The common carriers want to be indemnified from the content they carry. I=
n other words, the phone company doesn't want to be held liable for the E=
vil Plot planned over their phone lines. The price they pay for indemnif=
ication is that they must not care about ANY content (including content t=
hat competes with content offered by a non-carrier division of the common=
carrier). If they edit SOME content, then they are acting in the role o=
f a newspaper editor, and have assumed the mantle of responsibility for A=
LL content.=20
Carriers can, however, do what they need to do to keep their networks run=
ning, so they are permitted disrupt traffic that is damaging to the netwo=
rk.
The seedy side of all of this is that if a common carrier wants to block =
a particular set of content from a site/network, all they need to do is p=
oint out some technical badness that comes from the same general directio=
n. Since the background radiation of technical badness is fairly high fr=
om every direction, it's not too hard to find a good excuse when you want=
one.
David Hiers
CCIE (R/S, V), CISSP
ADP Dealer Services
2525 SW 1st Ave.
Suite 300W
Portland, OR 97201
o: 503-205-4467
f: 503-402-3277=20
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Lewis [mailto:jlewis@lewis.org]=20
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 6:58 AM
To: William Pitcock
Cc: nanog - n. am. network ops group list
Subject: Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed.
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009, William Pitcock wrote:
> It is widely known that AT&T loves censorship. They love censorship=20
> because it is profitable for them to love censorship, and this isn't=20
> the first time they have enmasse blocked access to a website they=20
> didn't like. This has nothing at all to do with forged ACK responses,=20
> and everything to do with content.
How does breaking things (censorship) make them more money?
http://njabl.org/faq.html#Q12
> AT&T does not have the right to filter what their users can access,=20
> period. You can put all the spin on it that you want, but in the end=20
> it's about content.
Whatever happened to "My network, my rules?" If AT&T blocks something, a=
nd as an AT&T customer, you don't like it, get your connectivity from som=
eone else.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lewis | I route
Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are
Atlantic Net |
_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the add=
ressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. I=
f the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorize=
d representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that =
any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you ha=
ve received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by =
e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system.
