mitch at netside.net
Thu May 24 02:38:11 UTC 2001
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Christopher B. Zydel wrote:
> Like any other "law", the MAPS RBL has power only because the population
> (of ISPs in this case) at large believes that it is just, and should be
> followed. ISPs that subscribe to MAPS RBL are saying that they believe
> that open relays should not exist, that MAPS should be able to test for this
> condition, and that they don't want to receive e-mail from non-compliant
> hosts. If you think this is a bad "law", then you'll need to convince enough
> of the rest of the population at large of such, and then perhaps ISPs will
> unsubscribe from the MAPS RBL.
The problem with your logic is that ad-hoc 'laws' conceived by majorities
do not necessarily reflect the actual law of the land. Our legal system
has conceived checks and balances against the tyranny of the majority.
There are compelling reasons throughout history why such system works
best. A trivial example of my point are anti-discrimination laws.
Unfortunately, technology jumped too far ahead, too fast. A lot of the
issues discussed here will revert back to normality, just like in any
aging frontier community, once the legal system catches up. Some may not
want the government's camel in their tent, but I say it's preferable to
the status quo and levels the playing field again for all players.
More information about the NANOG