[41394] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: end2end? (was: RE: Where NAT disenfranchises the end-user ...)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andy Dills)
Fri Sep 7 17:10:18 2001
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 17:09:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Andy Dills <andy@xecu.net>
To: "NANOG (E-mail)" <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20010907170024.A62566@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.32.0109071704170.7752-100000@shell.xecu.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> It also crosses an interesting legal line. If your an ISP customer
> and it's ok for the ISP to read your data stream and alter it in
> real time to provide NAT, why wouldn't it be legal for them to read
> your e-mail in real time as it passes, and alter what you said?
> The same boxes could do it. What makes it ok to alter an IP address
> here and there, but not alter a word? Why are they different?
Leo, let's not get crazy here.
One is content, the other a content-delivery mechanism. Think about the
post office. It's perfectly acceptable for them to stamp a forwarded
address on the envelope to ensure it's delivery, but perfectly
unacceptable to modify the content inside.
I know you're being facetious, but come on...
Andy
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Andy Dills 301-682-9972
Xecunet, LLC www.xecu.net
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dialup * Webhosting * E-Commerce * High-Speed Access
