[discuss] Transiting e-mails

Wed Jan 8 00:52:52 UTC 2014

Michel,

maybe you remember RFC 2804, IETF policy on wiretapping. Your proposal is
counter to it. Users can get the information you want with a traceroute.
Building in any more capacity in that direction is contrary to their
interests.

On the comparison with the ITU: the ITU actually sanctions wiretapping and
surveillance in telephone and related networks, as this is left to
governments to decide. Of course some governments will feel more
comfortable there.

Yours,

Alejandro Pisanty

On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Michel Gauthier <mg at telepresse.com> wrote:

> At 00:05 08/01/2014, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
>> Michel, it isn't a question of caring or not caring. The issue is
>> technical: the Internet is a datagram network, not a circuit-switched
>> network, and in a datagram network the sender has no control over the
>> path taken by the packet, which is determined dynamically inside the
>> network.
>>
>
> Brian,
> I am sorry: this is a not an adequate response.
>
> 1. the question is: how users can specify their needs and get their
> interests represented and defended? There is no consumer organization in
> the IG nor on /1net.
>
> 2. this question is illustrated by a vital case with a double suggestion
> for a solution:
>     - the first suggestion calls for a more advanced routing management
>     - the second suggestion calls for a modification of the packets that
> could be used to support in international cyberwar convention.
>
> If something which is needed by users is not technically possible in the
> current status of a technology, it is up to ist designers to work out a
> technical solution. As a user I am not interested in your best effort but
> in the delliverable. If it turns out that the technical community does not
> know how to deliver, or does not bother, an alternative must be seeked in
> calling on competition. This is what the lack of interest in the users'
> demands by the IAB leads to.
>
> Users wants a solution to be protected from private/public NSAs'
> surveillance. You say that the IAB/IETF cannot do it (while others say
> otherwise). Users therefore want an alternative proposition. This is why
> their Govs first look at the ITU. The US oppose. Then they to their own
> national R&D capacities. The users also ask FLOSS architects and designers.
> The I*people do not own the bandwidth: the users pay for it.
>
> This is why the question is: will the balkanization of the internet result
> from the IAB governance? If people do not trust the internet anymore it is
> because they trust the NSA, as being fully able to make it insecure. Why is
> the NSA able to do it so easily? Whose fault? The internet is broken, who
> can fix it? What is the cost? If the fault is with the IAB governance, can
> we trust the IAB governance to fix it?
>
> I do not know what Sao Paulo will really be about. Someone asked today:
> will Sao Paulo find plumbers for the Internet, outside of the Watergate
> ones? I think this is the whole question everyone has.
>
> I am sorry to be tought and thought provoking. But we need constructive
> answers, now: because alternative R&D and transition call for time.. We
> (the world) need to know if there is some able skippers in the cockpit, or
> if they just do not have the answers because it is too complicate.
>
> MG
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>

-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
     Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
Facultad de Química UNAM
Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
+52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD
+525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475
Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn,
http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140107/f2afe97a/attachment.html>