Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Horrible Service Agreements

  • From: Dean Anderson
  • Date: Mon Dec 01 19:20:41 1997

At 4:32 PM -0500 12/1/97, Vadim Antonov wrote:
>Cryptography can be used to produce non-transferrable keys
>allowing some party to send message to a particular recipient.
>Messages can include "right to respond" keys.
>
>The problem with authenticated messaging is how to send a message

Wow! What a heavy-handed technological alternative to the delete key.

>I was always saying that Internet is quite a step forward in
>promoting a right to speak.  Unfortunately as-is it is very bad
>at promoting the right not to listen.

I disagree.

The right not to listen is appropriately exercised by the delete key.  What
has been discussed are means to suppress speech by others.  The right to
respond? And some people don't have such a right?  Sounds like some
communist countries that don't exist anymore.  Didn't that cause riots,
wars, insurrection, mass killing, and other bad things?

Usenet perfected the solution to this problem many years ago: kill files,
and personal filters. Of course, that is my point: we have already been
through these problems years ago, and found acceptable technical solutions
for them.  But people insist on getting their underwear in a bunch
regarding spam, and inventing new solutions to old problems.

This may be too political for continued discussion on nanog.  If people
want to continue, will the next respondent add the relevant parties to the
cc list and remove nanog?

Also, I'm very interested in hard numbers on:

  T1, or T3 spam disconnects made (not just complaints made)
  Revenue forfeited due to these disconnects
  Information on how many spam factories there were, and what they are
doing now.  Did they quit, go somewhere else? They must have netly
employees who were known and can be located again.

  Have any *custoemrs* disconnected from you due to spam? This thread
started over the provision in a contract to disconnect the customer. Has
this been used in reverse to get out of a contract with a provider?

  Also, is anyone even considering breaking peering agreements with uplink
spam sources. (AGIS comes to mind, sorry AGIS).

Please email me privately.

Thanks

		--Dean


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
           Plain Aviation, Inc                  dean@av8.com
           LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP          http://www.av8.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++






Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.