"Default" Internet Service (was: Re: Points on your Internet driver's license)

Sun Jun 13 16:15:16 UTC 2004

I fully expect my ISP to turn me off if my site starts spewing abuse. 
However,
until that happens, I expect my ISP to deliver any valid IP datagram 
destined
for me, and, I expect to them to deliver any valid IP datagram I send out,
at least to the next AS in the path to the destination.

If they turn me off for spewing abuse, I expect them to immediately contact
me and provide as much information as they have about the nature of the
problem.  I think expect that it is my responsibility to identify and 
correct
the problem, notify my ISP, and wait a reasonable amount of time (possibly
as much as 24-48 hours) for them to turn me back on.

So far, this hasn't been a problem.

Owen

--On Saturday, June 12, 2004 9:54 PM -0400 John Curran <jcurran at istaff.org> 
wrote:

>
> The real challenge here is that the "default" Internet service is
> wide-open Internet Protocol, w/o any safeties or controls.   This
> made a lot of sense when the Internet was a few hundred sites,
> but is showing real scaling problems today (spam, major viruses,
> etc.)
>
> One could imagine changing the paradigm (never easy) so that
> the normal Internet service was proxied for common applications
> and NAT'ed for everything else...  This wouldn't eliminate all the
> problems, but would dramatically cut down the incident rate.
>
> If a site wants wide-open access, just give it to them.  If that turns
> out to cause operational problems (due to open mail proxies, spam
> origination, etc), then put 'em back behind the relays.
>
> /John

-- 
If it wasn't crypto-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/20040613/52fb0b48/attachment.sig>