From: Eric Shubert <[email protected]> > I haven't read the legislation, but since windoze (xp/vista/7) runs its > own resolver (DNS cache), it's conceivable that this might apply to all > windoze hosts, depending on how the word "server" is defined.
Practically all the machines at work have extensive /etc/hosts files in case the DNS boxes have a cow. I wonder if a stupid legislator would consider that a "server" in the right circumstances. If not, I'd think a bunch of people would start trading multi-M hosts.bz2 files and not paying as much attention to DNS. If so, really stupid stuff would happen, like saying, "A hosts file with more than N entries or entries for @HOSTNAMES is totally evidence that the possessor is attempting to subvert various laws!" That's pretty tinfoil-hattish. It's also something I could see people doing if they were completely idiotic, or thought they could get more money and power by doing. -- Matt G / Dances With Crows The Crow202 Blog: http://crow202.org/wordpress/ There is no Darkness in Eternity/But only Light too dim for us to see --------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - [email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
