|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 92 08:45:01 -0500 From: Dan Schlitt <dan@sci.ccny.cuny.edu> To: com-priv@psi.com, daveh@csn.org Ahhhhhh. What a fine rant, Dave. One need not buy into the complete freedom rhetoric to see that the acceptable use statements do not work on datagram networks that use routing as we now know it. If you want to play strictly by the rules then you have to restrict yourself to what is acceptable on the most restrictive network which a datagram might be routed through between the two hosts. To enforce the statements requires that one look into the contents of every datagram that passes through a gateway between networks with different standards. Even then it is not clear how one would determine if the contents are ok. To keep everyone's lawyers happy it probably will take an act of Congress to get it done. Instead of dinking around getting an opinion from their legal staff about the existing state of the law the NSF should ask congress for an unabiguous statement that there is no restriction on the use of the NSF/ANS backbone of the sort defined by the acceptable use statement. /dan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |