more on filtering

Fri Oct 31 16:11:51 UTC 2003

>
>> I don't see how that is the same thing here.  I have an
>> agreement with cust X to provide services in accordance with
>> my AUP.  cust X resells that service to cust Y, etc.  cust Y
>> is bound to the terms and conditions of my agreement with
>> cust X, despite that I do not have a direct agreement with cust Y.
>
> Oh christ...network engineers trying to be lawyers.
>
> I don't know much, but I do know that legal agreements in the US are NOT
> transitive in this way, unless each agreement is included by reference
> in the other.

Yes and no.  If my agreement with cust X says that they take responsibility
for ensuring that any customers to whom they resell my service (or any
traffic they transit into my network, to be more specific) must conform
to my AUP, then the fact that it is cust Y that originated the violating
traffic has little effect.  I can still hold cust X responsible.  As a
good guy and for good customer service, I will, instead, first ask X to
hold Y accountable and rectify the situation.  If that doesn't work,
you bet X will get disconnected or filtered.

Owen

-- 
If it wasn't signed, it probably didn't come from me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20031031/f4dc3073/attachment.sig>