Mouse wrote:
It would be possible for transit providers to stamp any packet that
has not been suitably filtered.
Sure. But who's going to bother, and why?
If the upper levels of Internet governance were to impose
responsibility - if ignoring such abusers could lose you your
connectivity, for example - this could be done. But, ever since the
invasion, Internet governance has been all about concentrating money in
fewer hands. That is, the net is defined to be working well when, and
to the extent that, it is doing that. (Consider that it's the US
government's Department of _Commerce_ that is at the top of the
pyramid.) Unsurprisingly, abuses such as DDoS are, therefore, ignored
by Internet authorities as long as the abusers pay their bills, and
suggestions such as yours that would mean turning off paying customers
will, at best, gain small amounts of traction at the edges of the net
where remnants of the pre-invasion cooperative net still linger.
No, I don't like it either.
Well, there also are parties like banks and governments that lately have
noticed that
the internet (or at least their part of it) that they are relying on for all of
their business
and all of their communication can easlily be taken down by a pimply teenager
in his
bedroom.
I think some of those parties are concerned about this, and want this situation
to be
rectified. Some of them may have enough power to change the way things are
managed.
Rob
_______________________________________________
pool mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool
