[152968] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ISPs and full packet inspection
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jay Ashworth)
Thu May 24 22:37:04 2012
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 22:36:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com>
To: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1205242206090.26549@whammy.cluebyfour.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner@cluebyfour.org>
> Aside from all of the business and legal sticking points that others have
> mentioned, there are also the technical aspects of capturing, storing,
> transporting, analyzing, and managing those packets, and the appliances
> that do the heavy lifting. As your traffic grows, that problem scales
> 1:1 linearly, at best, and more likely n:1 linearly, or worse. The
> added overhead of the infrastructure needed to support this will also make
> it more difficult to be price-competitive with your peers.
TL:DR; The reasons for doing this on any kind of general basis have to
be *EXCEPTIONALLY* compelling to make a business case for it, apart from
any possible legal ramifications.
I used asterisks *and* capital letters; that's about an order of magnitude.
Don't forget staffing.
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
