*BSD News Article 67837


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!news.vbc.net!garlic.com!fox.almaden.ibm.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!csnews!coopnews.coop.net!hops.entertain.com!usenet
From: dwatson@abwam.com (Darryl Watson)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.osf.misc,comp.unix.sco.misc,comp.secur
Subject: Re: Communications Decency Act may corrupt protocols
Date: 6 May 1996 14:37:04 GMT
Organization: ABWAM, Inc.
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <4ml2qg$3sg@hops.entertain.com>
References: <4l7k5h$if1@alca.Helsinki.FI> <4litt0$5n5@MICRO-HEART-OF-GOLD.MIT.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.45.153.241
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.5
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.protocols.tcp-ip:44358 comp.unix.bsd.misc:926 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3519 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:18850 comp.unix.osf.misc:3085 comp.unix.sco.misc:17286

In article <4litt0$5n5@MICRO-HEART-OF-GOLD.MIT.EDU>, jc@eddie.mit.edu (John Chambers) says:
>
	[snip]

>> There could be a US governement controlled filth gateway between
>> 'US-safenet' and the Internet.
>
>Perhaps this is  a  very  practical  idea.   This  is  not  materially
>different   from   the   "perimeter  network"  model  that  a  lot  of
>organizations are using for security.  The idea is fairly simple,  and
>is  described  in a lot of texts on security.  The organization simply
>provides two parallel networks, one an "internal" network that is  not
>connected  to the outside world, and the other the "perimeter" network
>that is connected.   A  small  number  of  gateways  between  the  two
>implement the organization's access policies.
>
>We  might start suggesting to the politicians that this be adopted for
>the Internet.  All the FQDNs in the ".us" domain  will  be  considered
>internal to the USA and subject to its jurisdiction. All other domains
>will be declared legally external to the USA.
>

<sarcasm>

That's it!  You've got the answer:

Anyone who fears the intrusion of thoughts which might change their own
world view can get a FQDN with the .ost suffix ("OstrichNet").  It would 
be a lot easier to regulate traffic via a 'dangerous concept' bit in
the network layer, or tagged at the application level, while at the same
time allowing the rest of us to communicate freely.  

Ha ha!  Free at Last!  I bet anyone that if this solution were proposed
to the US Congress, they'd eat it up.  Just think:  it looks like they
are doing something during an election year, when in fact they just
legislate a virtual wall into existence, while leaving the rest of us
alone.  The 'enforcement' burden would be taken off the FBI and put into
the hands of private citizens, just like they do with sales tax.

</sarcasm>