|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
From: tvest@eyeconomics.com To: Chris Edwards <chris@eng.gla.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOC.4.64.0910221236100.20354@bowling.cent.gla.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:33:09 -0400 Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org> Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org On Oct 22, 2009, at 7:38 AM, Chris Edwards wrote: > On Thu, 22 Oct 2009, Alex Balashov wrote: > > | Understood. I guess the angle I was going more for was: Is this =20= > actually > | practical to do in a country with almost as many Internet users as =20= > the US has > | people? > | > | I had always assumed that broad policies and ACLs work in China, =20 > but most > | forms of DPI and traffic pattern analysis aren't practical simply =20= > for > | computational feasibility reasons. Not unless the system were =20 > highly > | distributed. > > Perhaps they only need make an example of a few, and thus introduce an > element of fear for everyone else. Not "a few," but rather quite a lot, albeit only infrequently, and at =20= unpredictable intervals, with a very high inclusion/exclusion error =20 rate -- an artifact of the absence clear and easily demonstrable line =20= between compliance/non-compliance (which is itself an artifact of the =20= =E5=86=85=E9=83=A8 [internally published only] nature of many of the = related rules). http://www.usc.cuhk.edu.hk/wk_wzdetails.asp?id=3D2791 www.usc.cuhk.edu.hk/webmanager/wkfiles/2791_1_paper.pdf TV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |