IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Net Neutrality question

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Thu, 19 November 2015 06:02 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 667271A88F7 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 22:02:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.963
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.963 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.585, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tGxMl97XZZQf for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 22:02:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yk0-x230.google.com (mail-yk0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94AFE1A88F5 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 22:02:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ykfs79 with SMTP id s79so97705330ykf.1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 22:02:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=2TVOcfkKYYatXX0v2Wq6UbGuauSNM3ofAhehcs/rIgw=; b=IqirdSRLE99MVDPGcvnFHXcwjahqxC3yZu7tkBVisYqZwiU3Kap0iItChUC1vrkP49 acSSb5SfOkxcVFlV5RDTfaIdGtAIlaH3PR/PwVExtTlWvOVmZDxbRcxl13/3p/1YM7Rb gPHhHtlyu0Uasi/uHcyxtNnyQqCyyNLDi4TnjeUSUPIQPwebcpu92paT4TeNIW3HRXJ9 m94P599PyjFIhGe3SaG2h8R7kFqoAAm1FqE+c7lr5LZ6eItwHVwTFBoZrx4jGUmMjkGS z7DbgycYIIXcxQG/cDUvzoIsYGhEgXzZpu03dSJzhlaj4bZlMh1tL7tFLumlsVz7hlRa qlMQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=2TVOcfkKYYatXX0v2Wq6UbGuauSNM3ofAhehcs/rIgw=; b=TbllR6lX+bzC2UM7pm4HboHnYIF/ZY7kJb06iIeybsAcdgqvkrprUvzIJm3iz5+zpl KixTLHP6R3etfkvg5RGvwmk99UIKOkLnSl3kVJzg4l3hZhQ0FaL0Et3jQODkn3ZpbF6H NKetq3Gc32/xN78DOQmqbH/WTcZP8bpIOGIuWw3ASccj5Tm1QfjFhXEFUn4ZtqDwMoH3 4MVqPam+8u6Oh5R/bQ01RHadbOrAFGHNzSSGmqukiW5+jxTQtQI6vQO0zVt9Kt2UT8Pn GO8Z8wdn65kQ0xedhhmC9YBNNDy9uRWkCyfY6DsApHv1hFr07gsbRBr5MFYveh4LEg6u BAKw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkJ7vb3ipt20+N+mZbOUI3nxwhn/W+5KLFutXkX1jcbocm9LDk29cwYJ2tLNRh90oE0rISG
X-Received: by 10.129.42.4 with SMTP id q4mr5834286ywq.35.1447912947774; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 22:02:27 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.115.131 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 22:02:08 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4E9C6C1B-9F9C-4AD7-9822-DFFC8E406F86@cisco.com>
References: <4E9C6C1B-9F9C-4AD7-9822-DFFC8E406F86@cisco.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 15:02:08 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr1F-XbeEhqomXdreN+CLQqe7MmFTnw+R9nw_WK4VS0s3Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1141fb50eb73c90524de806e"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/VST_VHrE9J0lgfi5MT65sFjdjtc>
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Net Neutrality question
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 06:02:32 -0000

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Fred Baker (fred) <fred@cisco.com> wrote:

> The comment he makes is that "operators commonly" (by which I think he
> means his operator) "install DPI equipment watching for certain high volume
> applications such as file sharing, and block it."
>

Wouldn't that practice violate regulations or even laws in a number of
countries?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email