[32407] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Johnson)
Tue Nov 21 10:57:51 2000
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:06:32 -0500
From: Mike Johnson <mike.johnson@isunnetworks.com>
To: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20001121110632.C26339@i-sun.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <47FE39302BF73B4C93BC84B87341282C1F25@condor.lvrmr.mhsc.com>; from rmeyer@mhsc.com on Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 07:37:16AM -0800
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Roeland Meyer [rmeyer@mhsc.com] wrote:
> 4) Offer port filtering as an added premium service that adds to your
> revenue stream. That way it is customer choice. However, this only applies
> to access providers. Backbone providers don't have this option.
<me too>
Yes, this is -exactly- my thoughts on it.
</me too>
I also still firmly believe that backbone providers should not port filter.
I think that access providers should look at Roeland's suggestion and
go that route.
Mike
--
Mike Johnson
Network Engineer / iSun Networks, Inc.
Morrisville, NC
All opinions are mine, not those of my employer
