From: "Greg Wooledge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Would it be hard for an ISP to block out just Freenet traffic? >Yes, because Freenet runs on arbitrary TCP/IP ports. (The plurality of >nodes are running on port 19114, because some of the Freenet packages >default to that, but there are a great number of nodes that run on random >port numbers.) > >And even if they do block your node, you can just restart it on a >different port. (You'll have to move or purge your data store.) I forsee that the battle will be decided by the ISPs, and their individual decisions. Due to the (still) small number of people using non-standard protocols, ISPs face very small business disadvantage from restricting access to non-standard ports. For instance, my ISP has an explicit policy restricting me from running any kind of server. (bah!) There aren't many protocols requiring ISPs to allow incoming connections to subscribers' PCs. OTOH, ISPs tend to fear the economic threat of angry legal actions from content-owners. As one ISP explained to me, when I was hosting a banned book, "The revenue we receive from you is insignificant compared to the potential legal costs we could incur from court action. Therefore it makes little business sense to allow you to keep making that book available for download." The way I see it is that some or many ISPs will try firewalling off all non-standard connections, and only reinstate access to these if an overwhelming number of subscribers threaten to move to other ISPs. If I know AOL's mentality, with their large US market share, this is something they might try on. What will decide the outcome is whether a large enough percentage of ISPs dig in their heels and stand up to RIAA demands, and defend their subscribers' freedoms. If enough brave ISPs go it alone, they will in time gain a well-earned market share. But if ISPs collaborate, and jointly initiate port-blocking, then internet freedom will be a thing of the past. Until, of course, technologies such as Freenet start to 'tunnel' through the 'official' protocols. In *that* case, the *real* battle will begin - imagine the furore as masses of people find out that their intimate NetMeeting conversations are being monitored on suspicion that they're actually carrying Freenet traffic! Yet another scenario - "dob in"/"fink on" a Freenet node - RIAA pays lackeys to run Freenet nodes, and discover as many other Freenet nodes as possible - paying a bounty for every Freenet node found and shut down. And - getting more paranoid - RIAA, BSA, M$ etc setting up 'blacklists' of ISPs who (1) allow Freenet nodes, or (2) allow *any* traffic from other blacklisted nodes. A heavily bankrolled scheme where ISPs are assumed guilty unless proven otherwise - ISPs having to submit to detailed ongoing audits to maintain their "Intellectual Property Compliance Certification". Part of this certification requires the ISP to automatically block *all* traffic to/from non-certified ISPs. This is the kind of shit that Arthur Miller wrote about in The Crucible - "Are you now or have you ever been a file-sharer?". Times are getting interesting... David _______________________________________________ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
