On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 7:38 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> Whois contact details need to work so you can contact the zone owner when
> the DNS is broken for the zone.
>
> Publishing Whois data in the zone does not work for this purpose.
>
> This is not to discount other reasons for having a independe
On Fri, 20 Apr 2018 21:25:09 -, "Naslund, Steve" said:
> And you would be violating the law if it was ruled that your publication was
> in fact a publication under the law.
Citation please, where anonymous publication is, in and of itself, illegal under
US law
pgp3RkhByE_QC.pgp
Descript
On Fri, 20 Apr 2018 20:53:06 -, "Naslund, Steve" said:
> "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary
> Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
>
> No one ever had the liberty of publishing information to the public without
> accountability.
> You are givi
On Fri, 20 Apr 2018 12:03:37 +0200, Tei said:
> Maybe a good balance for whois is to include organization information
> so I know where a website is hosted, but not personal information, so
> I can't show in their house and steal their dog.
In many cases, the *OWNER* of a website doesn't have any
Whois contact details need to work so you can contact the zone owner when the
DNS is broken for the zone.
Publishing Whois data in the zone does not work for this purpose.
This is not to discount other reasons for having a independent communications
channel.
--
Mark Andrews
> On 21 Apr 2
-
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a
little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-
One last OT point. It's Friday after all... :)
https://www.npr.org/2015/03/02/390245038/ben-franklins-famous-liberty-safet
Steve,
I believe you are mistaken as to current law in the USA:
The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that the right to anonymous
free speech is protected by the First Amendment. A frequently cited
1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission
reads: Anonymity is a shield fr
Happy it’s helping!
- Jared
> On Apr 20, 2018, at 5:30 PM, Dylan Ambauen wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> I tossed a few different firmware versions I extracted here, as well as the
> flash0/flash1 images and the doc i found for it.
> http://puck.nether.net/~j
>Now we're way off-topic, but our constitution acknowledges that is a
>pre-existing right. The constitution didn't grant it to you. (Rights are
>inherent, privileges are granted)
>
>People have the right to speak, write, and publish whatever they want.
>
>-A
Our Constitution does not equal wor
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 6:35 PM, Aaron C. de Bruyn via NANOG <
nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 2:27 PM Naslund, Steve
> wrote:
>
> > They did not in fact have the "right" to publish those pamphlets.
>
>
> Now we're way off-topic, but our constitution acknowledges that is a
> pre
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 2:27 PM Naslund, Steve wrote:
> They did not in fact have the "right" to publish those pamphlets.
Now we're way off-topic, but our constitution acknowledges that is a
pre-existing right. The constitution didn't grant it to you. (Rights are
inherent, privileges are gran
On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> I tossed a few different firmware versions I extracted here, as well as
> the flash0/flash1 images and the doc i found for it.
> http://puck.nether.net/~jared/lb4m/
Thank you Jared. Still helpful almost 3 years later.
>Steve,
>
>I think you should re-examine the early history of the USA. Anonymous
>pamphleteering was the origin of our rebellion against England,
>with Benjamin Franklin and many of the other founding fathers
>publishing without their identities being registered anywhere. The
>Federalist Papers w
Steve,
I think you should re-examine the early history of the USA. Anonymous
pamphleteering was the origin of our rebellion against England,
with Benjamin Franklin and many of the other founding fathers
publishing without their identities being registered anywhere. The
Federalist Papers which fo
> "Wrong on several counts. You can publicly access the records of who
owns every radio station, television station, and newspaper in the US and a
lot of other countries. "
You can't access their *sources* without a warrant.
You seem to be conflating private individuals with corporations.
> "No
>...in every other form of communication, the phrase "get a warrant" comes to
>mind.
>Except on the internet where we require the information to be public so that
>anyone and their dog can view it without a warrant.
Wrong on several counts. You can publicly access the records of who owns every
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 12:53 PM Keith Medcalf wrote:
> This last statement is entirely untrue. WHOIS provides information as to
> the PUBLISHER (such as one would find on the masthead of a newspaper).
> This is, ought to be, and should remain, public information.
>
Oh, so I'm a newspaper now?
>> "I don't see why there should not be a way to know who is
>> publishing data on the Internet. In almost all other forms
>> of communication, there is some accountability for the
>> origination of information."
>...in every other form of communication, the phrase "get a warrant"
>comes to mind.
> "I don't see why there should not be a way to know who is publishing data
on the Internet. In almost all other forms of communication, there is some
accountability for the origination of information."
...in every other form of communication, the phrase "get a warrant" comes
to mind.
Except on t
That just sounds like a minor change to fix this, a bug. No need to
burn down the house to kill a mosquito.
And my suggestion to move the publicly visible WHOIS information into
the DNS and thus completely under the domain owner's control would fix
this with minimal effort from the registrant.
I
I don't see why there should not be a way to know who is publishing data on the
Internet. In almost all other forms of communication, there is some
accountability for the origination of information. Newspaper publishers are
known, radio stations are usually licensed and publicly known, televis
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 4:10 PM, wrote:
>
> On April 20, 2018 at 12:03 oscar.vi...@gmail.com (Tei) wrote:
> > Maybe a good balance for whois is to include organization information
> > so I know where a website is hosted, but not personal information, so
> > I can't show in their house and stea
On April 20, 2018 at 12:03 oscar.vi...@gmail.com (Tei) wrote:
> Maybe a good balance for whois is to include organization information
> so I know where a website is hosted, but not personal information, so
> I can't show in their house and steal their dog.
>
> I feel uneasy about having my p
Inline...
On April 20, 2018 at 03:47 fa...@gatech.edu (Badiei, Farzaneh) wrote:
> Dear John,
>
>
> The days when some in the technical community could just discard others
> arguments by saying that "[you] have no idea how the Internet works" have
> long
> passed. I will not get intimid
NANOG Community,
As a reminder, we are still accepting proposals for all sessions at
NANOG 73 in Denver, CO, June 25-27, 2018.
The full Call For Presentations can be found at:
http://www.cvent.com/d/ttqv1z/6K
Remaining Key Dates for NANOG 73:
Tuesday, 05/08/18 CFP Deadline: Presentation Slides
This message has been wrapped due to the DMARC policy setting to
prevent NANOG subscribers from being unsubscribed due to bounces.
--- Begin Message ---
NANOG Community,
As a reminder, we are still accepting proposals for all sessions at
NANOG 73 in Denver, CO, June 25-27, 2018.
The full Call For
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, SAFNOG
TZNOG, MENOG, BJNOG, SDNOG, CMNOG, LACNOG, IRNOG and the RIPE Routing WG.
Daily listings are sent to bgp-s
Well, if the US government spies on everyone using exported cisco hardware,
why wouldn't the PRC do the same?
On 20 April 2018 at 08:59, Aaron Gould wrote:
> Thanks Colton, Since I live in the US, and work for a boss that’s nervous
> (concerned) about those things, then I comply. I remember men
Thanks Colton, Since I live in the US, and work for a boss that’s nervous
(concerned) about those things, then I comply. I remember mentioning Huawei as
an option recently in a meeting and the boss and a few other fellow engineers
were nervous and resistant to it. I tend to feel the same.
Yes looks like they are both under pressure. I feel bad for the USA based
employees. I know Huawei has quite a few in Plano, Texas.
With both ZTE and Huawei out of the picture for USA operators, who is the
low cost leader in this space then?
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 7:56 AM, STARNES, CURTIS <
curt
Same for Huawei.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/26/17164226/fcc-proposal-huawei-zte-us-networks-national-security
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeanbaptiste/2018/04/19/analyst-chinas-huawei-to-quit-u-s-market/#194f570211cb
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/17/technology/huawei-trade-war.html
I don't
Josh,
I like the whitebox route, but I can't find anything that will come close
price wise.
Example, Huawei S6720 with 24 10G ports, 2 40G ports, and full MPLS
operating system from Huawei is $3500 out the door with a lifetime
warranty. I can't even find a whitebox hardware, not even accounting f
Ah. ZTE is in a spot of trouble right about now.
http://www.scmp.com/tech/article/2142557/zte-calls-us-government-ban-extremely-unfair-vows-fight-its-rights
On 20/04/18, 5:58 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Colton Conor"
wrote:
Of the two large Chinese Vendors, which has the better network operat
Why not just go the whitebox route and pick your NOS of choice?
Far cheaper, and far more flexible.
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 7:28 AM Colton Conor wrote:
> Of the two large Chinese Vendors, which has the better network operating
> system? Huawei is much larger that ZTE is my understanding, but larg
Of the two large Chinese Vendors, which has the better network operating
system? Huawei is much larger that ZTE is my understanding, but larger does
not always mean better.
Both of these manufactures have switches and routers. I doubt we will use
their routing products anytime soon, but the switch
Tei wrote:
>
> Maybe a good balance for whois is to include organization information
> so I know where a website is hosted, but not personal information, so
> I can't show in their house and steal their dog.
>
> I feel uneasy about having my phone available to literally everyone on
> the internet.
Maybe a good balance for whois is to include organization information
so I know where a website is hosted, but not personal information, so
I can't show in their house and steal their dog.
I feel uneasy about having my phone available to literally everyone on
the internet.
--
--
ℱin del ℳensaje
37 matches
Mail list logo