From: (no name) (no email)
Date: Mon Jul 10 2006 - 16:23:20 EDT
On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 15:25:55 EDT, Seth Johnson said:
> (2) Any person engaged in interstate commerce that charges
> a fee for the provision of Internet access must in fact
> provide access to the Internet in accord with the above
> definition, regardless whether additional proprietary
> content, information or other services are also
> provided as part of a package of services offered to
> consumers.
So how does all this mumbo-jumbo square up with the common practices of
blocking SMTP and the 135-139/445 ports to protect your own infrastructure from
the mass of malware that results if you don't block it? And does this mean
that my Verizon DSL isn't 'The Internet' because the customer side of the modem
hands me a DHCP address in RFC1918 space? For bonus points - is the DSL *still*
"not the Internet" if I bring my own DSL modem or hand-configure the DSL one to
mitigate the effects of NAT brain damage?
What percentage of cable and DSL access is an "unfair or deceptive act"
per the definition of this?
|
|
|