Thats not really a fair comparison, I think a lot of people have issues with people censoring/controlling/prioritizing internet access to make money. Its a somewhat more nuanced conversation when you are talking about doing the same thing to prevent abuse.
Cheers, Max > On Feb 26, 2016, at 10:32 AM, James Downs <e...@egon.cc> wrote: > > >> On Feb 26, 2016, at 06:31, Keith Medcalf <kmedc...@dessus.com> wrote: >> >> ISP's should block nothing, to or from the customer, unless they make it >> clear *before* selling the service (and include it in the Terms and >> Conditions of Service Contract), that they are not selling an Internet >> connection but are selling a partially functional Internet connection (or a >> limited Internet Service), and specifying exactly what the built-in >> deficiencies are. > > Absolutely. It’s funny that a group that worries about about net neutrality > and whinges about T-Mobile’s zero-rating certain video sources is perfectly > fine with blindly blocking *ports*, without even understanding if it’s > legitimate traffic. > >> Deficiencies may include: >> port/protocol blockage toward the customer (destination blocks) >> port/protocol blockage toward the internet (source blocks) >> DNS diddling (filtering of responses, NXDOMAIN redirection/wildcards, etc) > > This would be a big reason to point to a different DNS... > >> Traffic Shaping/Policing/Congestion policies, inbound and outbound >> >> Some ISPs are good at this and provide opt-in/out methods for at least the >> first three on the list. Others not so much. >
