"J. Baptista" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Incorrect, the NSI - RBL (MAPS) situation is a clear indication Vixie is
> well outside his range. He made an arbitrary decision which would of
> affected the business interests of NSI, by declareing thier communication
> with internic contacts to be spam. Vixie got a nice earful from his legal
> advisors and I feel confident he now knows that to do that sort of thing
> is wrong.
True, but that wasn't the point I was trying to make. I was referring
to other people's willingness to install RBL filters, especially at
the ISP level, which would affect all of the ISP's users.
> The problem is his power to do it. He's making judicial decisions on
> contractual obligations between parties. He knows now from his legal
> begals that he can get his fair share of paddy wacks for being
> naughty.
Again, not the point I was trying to make. He has no power to force
an ISP to install an RBL filter. The ISPs who do so believe this is
the right thing to do.
> Well there you go. So much for activisim. If he wants to pay the
> bridge toll he's gotta do the appropriate brown nosing. Completely
> understandable, completely acceptable, but under no circumstances is
> he an activist. More of a yes man.
I said he can be an activist for some issues. Also, I think that a
position most large companies might take would be anti-spam, but pro
DNS stability (thus pro-ICANN). So it's not necessarily hypocritical
of him to take money from large companies to distribute bind with the
IANA root servers in root.cache.
--gregbo
