[james@towardex.com: Re: [OCCAID] Proposal for EINTAP]
James
james at towardex.com
Fri Jan 14 03:21:53 EST 2005
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 12:45:03PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
>
> Miles Nordin <carton at Ivy.NET> wrote:
> >>>>>>"j" == James <james at towardex.com> writes:
> >
> > j> If you have problems with tunnel or other provisioning due to
> > j> differences of opinions, you are welcome to bring that to my
> > j> attention in private and I will deal with that.
> >
> >thanks. :' I wasn't worried about anything like that myself since I've
> >been around a few months and know how fast you guys are, but at least
> >one guy wrote me privately, and refused to post in public when I
>
> What was the point of dragging this dirty linen out to wash on politech
> btw?
I am quite dissapointed that an unofficial irc channel would be taken
out of context, and be used as a political bait in a public mailing list.
Now we have more politics and explanations to do since traffic on
www.occaid.org has been increasing with people looking for how bad we are.
Furthermore, such channel as discussed in the snippet is deemed as "low
quality, or such" channel where there are often times inappropriate things
said there (kind of like EFnet #nanog), by others. It is dissapointing that
one would take such known unprofessionalism to heart and post it to
politech. The channel itself was also cleared marked by itself in terms
of dis-association with the project.
First of all, I will personally apologize to anyone who has read any
offensive words in the snippet posted on politech, whether or not they
were said by me or any other.
>
> Now the usual, hackneyed and quite wrong "spam filtering is censorship"
> arguments will get trotted out by various people .. oh well.
Indeed.
I will tell you right now that all other members have not expressed
concerns about so-called policy to dns-spam issues.
If people who are against dns-spam issues actually find ways to tell us
THEIR SOLUTIONS instead of whining and then leaking the dirty linen to
politech and public sources, perhaps we will stop being so aristocratic
and listen up. We have no time on ourselves to think of better or
more compromising solutions to a number of factors, one being that we
are not paid to run this network and have stressing day job ourselves
therefore we simply do not care, and two being labor issues.
May be we are dumb in some ways which I can understand. So why don't you
help us help you? I have not heard proposals from others about how to
approach the IRC-kidz, IRC-abuse, network-abuse issues OCCAID is having
with respect to IRC usage other than from Tom McNeely who first sent the
proposal. We are tired of dealing with abuse reports and tired of dealing
with unproductive denial of service attacks flowing over IPv6. We are
tired, and our peers are tired, and our transit providers are tired.
Especially when OCCAID pays NOTHING for its IPv6 peering and transit
services, we are placing inconvenience on them to help us.
Regarding OCCAID being the censorship network of IPv6 interweb, well
may be it is because we are one of the few who have behaviors that
are often happening in IPv4 production internet as far as people
using the network? I am not exactly sure... but this is besides the
point. But like I said, we do not have human nor funding resources
to deal with network abuse issues. All of our larger downstreams
including 100% of all downstream ASN/ISP's have their own abuse
department and we trust them completely in handling abuse of their
own and they have done so. Do we have resources to do that for
regular endusers right now, apparently no.
This anti-spam business has gone way over the line and quite frankly
from my perspective, if you have the issue with it, please express your
proposed solutions. I have placed hold on the "policy" so that it
can be reviewed and modified and re-enacted. Or if it is too late
to hear this kind of email from me, or if it is too late to make
any further difference, then there is nothing more I can do for you.
And finally, expressing your disagreement is appreciated, and I can
respect the concern being posted to Politech about this issue.
Further, I appreciate the good words put into the project goals in
your well articulated background information to Declan. But, posting
discussions like this, particularly from a known unprofessional and
unrelated IRC channel to Politech is over the line; it is from our
point of view, simply encouraging our peers to depeer us, which is
quite damaging to the project effort and unproductive. I regret that
better ways to handle this problem were not explored, with both
sides at fault, including my own.
-J
>
>
> Declan McCullagh <declan at well.com> wrote:
> >Here's some background on IPv6, the "next generation" Internet
> >Protocol: http://www.ipv6.org/
> >http://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng/html/ipng-main.html
> >
> >-Declan
> >
> >-------- Original Message --------
> >Subject: submission: ``DNS spam'' forbidden on OCCAID
> >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:48:59 -0500
> >From: Miles Nordin <carton at Ivy.NET>
> >To: declan at well.com
> >
> >OCCAID, an experimental contributor-based IPv6 ISP in the US, has just
> >published a policy saying that DNS reverse-lookup hostnames like:
> >
> > care.bears.want.to.evicerate.us
> >
> >meaning, long DNS names that spell out words or phrases, are forbidden
> >on their network. They even have an autocensor program that
> >calculates if a hostname is so-called ``DNS spam'' or not:
> >http://spamcalc.net/
> >
> >The policy was adopted on 2005-01-11. The DNS spam stuff is in
> >section 14. Here is the policy:
> >
> > http://www.occaid.org/proposals/eintap.txt
> >
> >Here's an archive of the discussion of the policy on their members
> >mailing list:
> >
> > http://web.Ivy.NET/~carton/occaid/msg00553.html
> >
> >Here's James Jun's opinion of it on the ``unofficial'' #occaid channel
> >on efnet:
> >
> > http://web.Ivy.NET/~carton/occaid-irc.txt
> >
> >The thing that disturbs me most is that the policy is dumb, and that
> >the IPv6 Innurnet is starting to have all the same Interweb
> >quasi-censorship problems of the regular Internet, where ISPs block
> >port 80, where downstream is way cheaper than upstream, where
> >always-on IPs are dynamic for no good technical reason, and so on.
> >
> >Libertarians may object more to the way a small inner-circle is making
> >decisions that aren't subject to debate on the list where all the
> >financial, transit/colocation, and technical contributors discuss
> >things. Politech readers might be disappointed by technical people
> >saying ``i'm not interested in politics---it's not my problem.''
> >
> >Or maybe it is just some local quarrel, and you don't care at all.
> >Anyway. there it is. sorry for the noise if you don't want it.
> >
> >
> >Background:
> >
> >OCCAID is an experimental IPv6 network in the US. Anyone can join for
> >free, and they are much better than other ways to get IPv6:
> >
> > freenet6.net: very slow. no BGP.
> > he.net: blocks tcp port 6667. (i've never tried them)
> > 6to4: very slow. no BGP. no reverse-DNS.
> >
> >One can connect to OCCAID using a gif IPv6-over-IPv4 tunnel, and the
> >network is very well-run with low latency, diverse peering, and good
> >reliability.
> >
> >The requirements for membership are: (1) you must be genuinely
> >interested in network experimentation, like learning BGP, OSPF, IPv6,
> >and helping other members, and (2) you must have a mostly-static IP
> >because unlike the other three tunnels, they configure their tunnels
> >manually, and (3) noncommercial use.
> >
> >OCCAID has both end-node members like people with DSL and cable
> >connections, but they also peer with big ISPs in carrier-neutral
> >colocation facilities all over the US. If you have a rack in such a
> >facility you can order an Ethernet cable to OCCAID for IPv6 transit,
> >and if you are an ISP you can peer with them to give IPv6 connectivity
> >to your customers.
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Politech mailing list
> >Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
> >Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
>
> _______________________________________________
> OCCAID Mailing List: http://www.occaid.org
> schednetisr(NETISR_COFFEE); inq=&coffeebreak_intrq;
>
> Occaid at cnacs.occaid.org is the list posting address.
> db-admin at cnacs.occaid.org is the human contact address.
> See below URL for subscribe/unsubscribe and list options:
> http://mailman.twdx.net/mailman/listinfo/occaid
--
James Jun TowardEX Technologies, Inc.
Technical Lead Boston IPv4/IPv6 Web Hosting, Colocation and
james at towardex.com Network design/consulting & configuration services
cell: 1(978)-394-2867 web: http://www.towardex.com , noc: www.twdx.net
----- End forwarded message -----
--
James Jun TowardEX Technologies, Inc.
Technical Lead Boston IPv4/IPv6 Web Hosting, Colocation and
james at towardex.com Network design/consulting & configuration services
cell: 1(978)-394-2867 web: http://www.towardex.com , noc: www.twdx.net
More information about the Occaid
mailing list