[151699] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BCP38 Deployment
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Leo Bicknell)
Wed Mar 28 19:35:41 2012
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 16:35:02 -0700
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Mail-Followup-To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <B4F5530B-213B-4FB5-A3A4-CF3220E9D981@virtualized.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--AhhlLboLdkugWU4S
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a message written on Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 02:49:02PM -0700, David Conrad=
wrote:
> On Mar 28, 2012, at 12:03 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> > Tier 1 T640 core network with 10GE handoff
> > Regional Cisco GSR network with 1GE handoff
> > Local 1006 to Arris CMTS
> > Subscriber Motorola Cable Modem to NetGear SOHO Gateway
> > User Patron with Airport Express sharing a wired connection to =
WiFi
> > ...
> > If you were going to write it into law/regulation, where would you requ=
ire it?
>=20
> Seems to me that from a legislator's perspective, there is a pretty brigh=
t (as in "moth attracted to flame") line between "subscriber" and "provider=
".
The counterpoint I would offer is their are the most lobbiests and
lawyers on the "provider" side of that equation, and indeed in the
entire stack best I can tell.
> And the incentive for CPE manufacturers to invest in the small software c=
ost is?
The "provders" are large buyers of much of the CPE, and in some
cases get to approve what CPE gets attached to their network. They
can push this on the CPE manufacturers, and should.
I suspect if legislators tried to push the issue their lobbiests
and lawyers would attempt to stall and deflect, and that would be
the direction.
Many places already have laws that running an unsecured WiFi network
is the subscriber's problem, not the providers. There's already
operational and legal precident that the person running that end
router should be responsible.
--=20
Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
--AhhlLboLdkugWU4S
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD)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=n1dq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--AhhlLboLdkugWU4S--
