Parler

Sun Jan 10 22:50:58 UTC 2021

Right, it's not a list for content hosting.

Scott Helms

On Sun, Jan 10, 2021, 5:42 PM <sronan at ronan-online.com> wrote:

> No, this is a list for Network Operators.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 10, 2021, at 5:32 PM, K. Scott Helms <kscott.helms at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> 
> This is a list for pushing bits.  The fact that many/most of us have other
> businesses doesn't make this an appropriate forum for SIP issues (to use my
> own work as an example).
>
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021, 4:52 PM <sronan at ronan-online.com> wrote:
>
>> This is a list for Network Operators, AWS certainly operates networks.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Jan 10, 2021, at 4:27 PM, K. Scott Helms <kscott.helms at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> No,
>>
>> It really does not.  Section 230 only applies to publishers, and not to
>> network providers.  If this were a cloud hosting provider list then you'd
>> be correct, but as a network provider's list it does not belong here.
>>
>>
>> Scott Helms
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 3:21 PM Lady Benjamin PD Cannon <ben at 6by7.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> As network operations and compute/cloud/hosting operations continue to
>>> coalesce, I very much disagree with you.  Section 230 is absolutely
>>> relevant, this discussion is timely and relevant, and it directly affects
>>> me as both a telecom and cloud compute/services provider.
>>>
>>>
>>> —L.B.
>>>
>>> Lady Benjamin PD Cannon, ASCE
>>> 6x7 Networks & 6x7 Telecom, LLC
>>> CEO
>>> ben at 6by7.net
>>> "The only fully end-to-end encrypted global telecommunications company
>>> in the world.”
>>> FCC License KJ6FJJ
>>>
>>> <Speedtest9118.png>
>>> <Ben LIC.png>
>>>
>>> On Jan 10, 2021, at 12:13 PM, K. Scott Helms <kscott.helms at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> It's not, and frankly it's disappointing to see people pushing an agenda
>>> here.
>>>
>>>
>>> Scott Helms
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 9:37 AM <sronan at ronan-online.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> NANOG is a group of Operators, discussion does not have to be about
>>> networking. I have already explained how this represents a significant
>>> issue for Network Operators.
>>>
>>> On Jan 10, 2021, at 9:09 AM, Mike Bolitho <mikebolitho at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> 
>>> It has nothing to do with networking. Their decision was necessarily
>>> political. If you can specifically bring up an issue, beyond speculative,
>>> on how their new chosen CDN is somehow now causing congestion or routing
>>> issues on the public internet, then great. But as of now, that isn't even a
>>> thing. It's just best to leave it alone because it will devolve into chaos.
>>>
>>> - Mike Bolitho
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021, 6:54 AM <sronan at ronan-online.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Why? This is extremely relevant to network operators and is not
>>> political at all.
>>>
>>> On Jan 10, 2021, at 8:51 AM, Mike Bolitho <mikebolitho at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> 
>>> Can we please not go down this rabbit hole on here? List admins?
>>>
>>> - Mike Bolitho
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021, 1:26 AM William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Anybody looking for a new customer opportunity? It seems Parler is in
>>> search of a new service provider. Vendors need only provide all the
>>> proprietary AWS APIs that Parler depends upon to function.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/09/amazon-parler-suspension/
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Bill HErrin
>>>
>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20210110/b94c9b47/attachment.html>