[118575] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ISP port blocking practice
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (James R. Cutler)
Fri Oct 23 19:34:48 2009
From: "James R. Cutler" <james.cutler@consultant.com>
In-Reply-To: <20091023221545.GH4947@dan.olp.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:33:58 -0400
To: Dan White <dwhite@olp.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
No, blocking a port does not restrict a customers use of the network
any more than one way streets restrict access to downtown stores. It
just forces certain traffic directions in a bicycle/motorcycle/car/van/
truck neutral manner. Carry anything you want. Others laws restrict
incendiary content.
On Oct 23, 2009, at 6:15 PM, Dan White wrote:
> On 23/10/09 17:58 -0400, James R. Cutler wrote:
>> Blocking the well known port 25 does not block sending of mail. Or
>> the
>> message content.
>
> It does block incoming SMTP traffic on that well known port.
>
>> I think the relevant neutrality principle is that traffic is not
>> blocked
>> by content.
>
> My personal definition doesn't quite gel with that. You're deciding
> for the
> customer how they can use their connection, before you have any
> evidence of
> nefarious activity.
>
> Would you consider restricting a customer's outgoing port 25 traffic
> to a
> specific mail server a step over the net neutrality line?
>
> --
> Dan White
James R. Cutler
james.cutler@consultant.com
