>>
>> 1. an Internet service provider which deliberately intercepts traffic
>> (say, an IP packet) which was intended for one address or service,
>> and delivers it to another address or service (say that of an
interception
>> proxy) may be misrepresenting the service it provides (it's not really
>> providing IP datagram delivery service because IP doesn't work this way).
>
>Okay, I think I see the mistake you're making. You're crossing
>abstraction layers and conflating two different things (the name of
>a service with the end point of the connection to that service). You
>are criticizing the moving of an endpoint when what you really
>object to is the misrepresentation of a service. Or do you also
>object to HTTP redirects, dynamic URL rewriting, CNAMEs, telephone
>Call Forwarding, or post office redirecting of mail after you move?
I think we are confusing the issue here. Earlier in this thread I found the
following written by Keith Moore:
>2. A primary purpose of the NECP protocol appears to be to
>facilitate the operation of so-called interception proxies. Such
>proxies violate the Internet Protocol in several ways:
>
>(1) they redirect traffic to a destination other than the one
>specified in the IP header,
>
>(2) they impersonate other IP hosts by using those hosts' IP addresses
>as source addresses in traffic they generate,
>(3) for some interception proxies, traffic which is passed on to the
>destination host, is modified in transit, and any packet-level
>checksums are regenerated.
Regardless of what occurs at higher layers, there is still the problem of
changing the source address in an IP packet which occurs at the network(IP)
layer.
Michael B. Bellopede
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"There is no spoon."
