On 3/12/2019 12:56 PM, Paul Vixie wrote: >> As Stephane wrote, that may be legit in some circumstances, but much >> more questionable in others, such as a hotel Wi-Fi attempting to decide >> what sites I could or could not access. It really is a tussle. > i don't like the chinese government's rules for the great firewall. so, i > keep > my visits to that otherwise-great country short. this hurts me, and maybe > hurts them also. but, it's their country, and i will obey their laws when i > am > using their network. and then i'll vote with my feet, to get to a better > network with better rules. i once traveled to HK for a weekend between two > week-long conferences behind the GFW, just so i could get work done.
There is a lot of difference between what can be imposed in a police state and what looks legitimate in a user agreement in a free country. And I sure hope that we maintain that difference. A good result of that discussion would be to clarify these differences. For example, there are legal differences between what can be done in a private home, and what can be done in a place like a hotel that provides public accommodation. Just like hotels cannot discriminate against some categories of customers, I don't think that places providing public connectivity should be able to discriminate against content accessed by their guests. -- Christian Huitema
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
