Peter Evans wrote: > On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 09:08:11PM -0400, Larry Seltzer wrote: >> How about a voluntary system? If an ISP offered a "clean" network with >> rules like this would there be any value to opting in to it? > > Expecting the average user to get off his fat arse and opt-in is > optimism in the extreme. Perhaps if they were paid to do it, a few > would. >
Raise rates 10%, You can avoid the rate-hike if you opt-in. As the non-clean rate rises over time the opt-in rate WILL go up (so will the attrition rate...). However I'm not sure I trust Comcast to actually implement an Opt-out. I've tried > 3 times to opt-out of their "helpful" NXDOMAIN replacement service. I actually had to convince one phone-rep that I do not feel any embarrassment upon receipt of an NXDOMAIN. The other question is about non-compliant clients. If NAC were implemented how would they handle systems that can't run the client such as routers,waps,set-top boxes, gaming systems etc. NAC works better in controlled corporate environments where there is a fiat controlling what is allowed to be connected to the network. I want to be safe, but I'm not about to run code from comcast on my Wii... > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. > https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec > Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list. > TREND MICRO EMAIL NOTICE The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system. _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
