Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Dylan Oliver]

On 6/29/06, Rick Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The difference between FON and nimrod customers, is that FON isexploiting this for THEIR gain.   is flowing, at my expense, intoFON's pockets, due to a nimrod customer that installed their gear at the
violation of my AUP.Again, plz read fon.com website, so conveniently located at fon.com. Especially the page which invites operators to participate in the extraction of $$$ from Aliens and Bills using access points hosted by your subscribers. 
ya.-- Dylan OliverPrimaverity, LLC
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Tom DeReggi]

Yeah,
 
its jsut like a drug manuafacturer selling speed 
for fat loss knowing the possible harm, and getting off teh hook because of the 
little disclaimer that says, "please consult your doctor to see if this is right 
for you", knowing that 99% of people would never do that, nor read the fine 
print.
 
With a business plan targeting the sales of 
millions of routers, its clear they could care less wether the end user violates 
their acceptable use policy.
 
Are there any ISPs that allow circuit sharing, 
legally?  I know a number of DSL resellers that allow circut sharing, but 
don;t disclose that their underlying agreement with their carrier prohibits 
it. 
 
Tom DeReggiRapidDSL & Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless 
Broadband
 
 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Dylan 
  Oliver 
  To: WISPA General List 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 8:53 
  PM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net 
  neutrality
  On 6/28/06, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
  wrote:
  
  


If it was, then it would be illegal to block 
hackers and criminals from using your network as well.
As FON clearly has no concern for Acceptable 
Use Policiies, therefore illegal activity, and AUPs are clearly allowable 
and enforcable contracts.
 
Strategically its a great time for FON to 
release their venture, to test the rules, the public, and 
ISPs.
   Wow, have any of you actually reviewed their site? OMFG 
  the sky is falling ! You may be interested in http://en.fon.com/biz/isps_friends.php.Also, 
  the Terms and Conditions of Use CLEARLY states:4. Prior 
  RequirementsThe user that opts for the Linus or Bill category, should, 
  prior to accepting these T&Cs and before registering with the FON 
  Community:(i) have a FON Social Router or a router that is compatible with 
  the FONSoftware and (ii) have a contract with an ISP that permits the 
  FONero to sharebandwidth.Best,-- Dylan 
  OliverPrimaverity, LLC 
  
  

  -- WISPA Wireless List: 
  wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: 
  http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Sam Tetherow]

Peter R. wrote:


Rick Smith wrote:

I still don't see why anyone should be able to use my network without 
paying me for the right to do so.  PERIOD.
 
I don't run a network for the benefit of the free world, I run it for 
the benefit of my checkbook.  Which needs SERIOUS help.  :)
 
OK, and while we're at it, why is "net neutral" good ?   I admit I've 
ignored most of the discussions on it due to the fact that I'm NOT a 
supporter.



We are at this point in telecom for exactly these reasons:
1) Many do not even understand the issue, but take a side in it
2) Everyone was saying regulate them, but not us
3) It's my network I can do what I want with it

Net Neutrality means that I buy an open, unfiltered pipe to the INTERNET.
The best argument I have heard is that if you are offering a 
restricted pipe, then say so, because you are not offering the 
INTERNET. (Remember AOL used to have its community and you would open 
a portal to the WWW).


That doesn't mean you can't prevent a degradation on your network, but 
that doesn't mean you get to give one content or app provider priority 
over another.


I think this is where much of the disagreement, atleast in the ISP 
community, is coming from.  What is preventing degradation (or QoS on 
sensitive traffic), vs offering a restricted pipe.


I doubt there are many of us that think offering better service to yahoo 
over google is a good business practice, and despite much of the 
campaigning, I doubt this is a realistic scenario.  The people that take 
this approach are going to find themselves on the outs in markets where 
they have competition, and it places where they don't they might just 
find new competition.  I can't imagine google and yahoo paying the 
price.  The tactic will only work effectively if someone pays and 
someone else doesn't otherwise they will all suck equally.


My concern is that if legislation is passed to say we can't prioritize 
one provider over another (yahoo over google) then it isn't much of a 
slope to where we won't be able to perform QoS on a network.


For instance, if it is easy to identify VOIP traffic to the major 
players (Vonage, Packet8, etc.) but not easy to identify an obscure 
player who uses different ports then wouldn't we be in violation of the 
legislation since we do offer better service to only the major players? 

What about competing services with different implementations such as 
bittorrent vs ftp for legal file distribution.  If I prioritize 
bittorrent under ftp for degredation reasons am I not in effect offering 
a restricted pipe to anyone that uses bittorrent to distrubute their files?


   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless



The problem becomes when the customer only has one BB choice and that 
provider restricts his usage.


And about FON... how is that any different that the nimrod consumers 
who leave their Linksys AP wide open??





This is just me rambling this morning.

- Peter





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Rick Smith]

The difference between FON and nimrod customers, is that FON is
exploiting this for THEIR gain.   is flowing, at my expense, into
FON's pockets, due to a nimrod customer that installed their gear at the
violation of my AUP. 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter R.
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 9:34 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net
neutrality

Rick Smith wrote:

> I still don't see why anyone should be able to use my network without 
> paying me for the right to do so.  PERIOD.
>  
> I don't run a network for the benefit of the free world, I run it for 
> the benefit of my checkbook.  Which needs SERIOUS help.  :)
>  
> OK, and while we're at it, why is "net neutral" good ?   I admit I've 
> ignored most of the discussions on it due to the fact that I'm NOT a 
> supporter.

We are at this point in telecom for exactly these reasons:
1) Many do not even understand the issue, but take a side in it
2) Everyone was saying regulate them, but not us
3) It's my network I can do what I want with it

Net Neutrality means that I buy an open, unfiltered pipe to the
INTERNET.
The best argument I have heard is that if you are offering a restricted
pipe, then say so, because you are not offering the INTERNET. (Remember
AOL used to have its community and you would open a portal to the WWW).

That doesn't mean you can't prevent a degradation on your network, but
that doesn't mean you get to give one content or app provider priority
over another.

The problem becomes when the customer only has one BB choice and that
provider restricts his usage.

And about FON... how is that any different that the nimrod consumers who
leave their Linksys AP wide open??

This is just me rambling this morning.

- Peter



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Peter R.]

Rick Smith wrote:

I still don't see why anyone should be able to use my network without 
paying me for the right to do so.  PERIOD.
 
I don't run a network for the benefit of the free world, I run it for 
the benefit of my checkbook.  Which needs SERIOUS help.  :)
 
OK, and while we're at it, why is "net neutral" good ?   I admit I've 
ignored most of the discussions on it due to the fact that I'm NOT a 
supporter.


We are at this point in telecom for exactly these reasons:
1) Many do not even understand the issue, but take a side in it
2) Everyone was saying regulate them, but not us
3) It's my network I can do what I want with it

Net Neutrality means that I buy an open, unfiltered pipe to the INTERNET.
The best argument I have heard is that if you are offering a restricted 
pipe, then say so, because you are not offering the INTERNET. (Remember 
AOL used to have its community and you would open a portal to the WWW).


That doesn't mean you can't prevent a degradation on your network, but 
that doesn't mean you get to give one content or app provider priority 
over another.


The problem becomes when the customer only has one BB choice and that 
provider restricts his usage.


And about FON... how is that any different that the nimrod consumers who 
leave their Linksys AP wide open??


This is just me rambling this morning.

- Peter



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[David E. Smith]

Dylan Oliver wrote:

> http://en.fon.com/biz/isps_friends.php.
> 
> (i) have a FON Social Router or a router that is compatible with the FON
> Software and (ii) have a contract with an ISP that permits the FONero to
> share bandwidth.

And how many of your customers actually read all the fine print in your
TOS? I know mine don't. :(

David Smith
MVN.net
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Dylan Oliver]

On 6/28/06, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:







If it was, then it would be illegal to block 
hackers and criminals from using your network as well.
As FON clearly has no concern for Acceptable Use 
Policiies, therefore illegal activity, and AUPs are clearly allowable and 
enforcable contracts.
 
Strategically its a great time for FON to release 
their venture, to test the rules, the public, and ISPs. Wow, have any of you actually reviewed their site? OMFG the sky is falling ! You may
be interested in http://en.fon.com/biz/isps_friends.php.Also, the Terms and Conditions of Use CLEARLY states:4. Prior RequirementsThe user that opts for the Linus or Bill category, should, prior to accepting these
T&Cs and before registering with the FON Community:(i) have a FON Social Router or a router that is compatible with the FONSoftware and (ii) have a contract with an ISP that permits the FONero to share
bandwidth.Best,-- Dylan OliverPrimaverity, LLC
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Dustin Jurman]

Tom,

You have a lot of good points, but so does Charles and others, Why don't you
petition WISPA and some of the other ISP organization to sponsor a Net
Neutrality bakeoff. You can have views from the service provider aspects.  

What needs and will come out of it in the end will be the discussion of how
complex this issue is.  Then Steam it so people can watch get educated on
their own time.  (The ISP organization can brand the daylights out of it for
their contributions). 

Dustin






-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 3:23 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net
neutrality

I understood Charles post regarding net neutrality, that you summarized also

very clearly.
My point is that Net Neutrality conflicts with other laws and regulations as

well.
So voting for some thing for one reason, could also mean voting against it 
for another.

For a strong Net NEtrality act, you'd aahve to allow FON, but for other 
leegal matters, you'd have to deny FON.  So it becomes a compflict of which 
issue is more important to protect? Whcih has precidence?

Thats what Congress and ISPs have to decide. Its not a right ro wrong 
answer. Its what answer has more (or more important) rights than wrongs?

I think Home Land Security/Law inforcement/ Privacy advocates, and Net 
Neutrality experets really need to be ALL working on the Net neutrality 
issue together, because its all intertwined.  What I see happening is a 
bunch of conflicting regulations being passed, with out rtealizing it when 
getting voted on.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Sam Tetherow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 2:13 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net 
neutrality


>I think what Charles is getting at is, is it legal for an ISP to place the 
>'no open AP' or 'no sharing your connection' restriction on your service? 
>I have heard some people arguing the case that NN is "I'm paying for my 
>bandwidth so I can do what I want to with it".
>
>
>Sam Tetherow
>Sandhills Wireless
>
> Tom DeReggi wrote:
>
>> If it was, then it would be illegal to block hackers and criminals from 
>> using your network as well.
>> As FON clearly has no concern for Acceptable Use Policiies, therefore 
>> illegal activity, and AUPs are clearly allowable and enforcable 
>> contracts.
>>  Strategically its a great time for FON to release their venture, to test

>> the rules, the public, and ISPs.
>>  Tom DeReggi
>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> *From:* Charles Wu <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> *To:* 'WISPA General List' <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2006 10:32 AM
>> *Subject:* RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com <http://www.fon.com> - a threat
>> to us all? - back to net neutrality
>>
>> out of curiosity (would like input from the pro net neutral
>> people) -- would blocking something like FON constitute a
>> violation of net neutrality?
>>  -Charles
>>
>> ---
>> CWLab
>> Technology Architects
>> http://www.cwlab.com
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Rick Smith
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2006 8:41 AM
>> *To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
>> *Subject:* [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all?
>>
>>  Anyone seen FON ?   This is insane.
>>  Anyone test one yet ?   I want to know what network their
>> hotspot runs back to, so I can block it
>>  Can someone that might have one throw a sniffer against it ?
>>
>>

>> -- 
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> !DSPAM:16,44a2c5c4194921117628507!
>
>
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/











-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Mark Koskenmaki]

Why don't we as an industry organization start putting net neutrality in
clear light.   We've got people running around using the "net neutrality"
banner to demand unfiltered P2P use, unlimited data transfers, or that QOS
NOT be implemented.

I think it would be more constructive if we broke this up a bit and more
clearly focused on certain issues:

1.   restricting end users from sites "for pay".I think this is THE
issue of importance.   Can, say, SBC, demand money from content providers
for SBC's dsl and dialup customers to reach it?

2.  restricting use of a service in TOS agreements with contracted customer.
( limits on transfer,  hosting prohibitions, etc, etc)

3.  Network operations.  (blocking malicious traffic, broadcast packets,
QOS, blah blah)

I see all three of these mixed together under the banner of "net neutrality"
and I think it has done a huge amount ot cloud the debate and discussion,
rather than enlighten or resolve anything.

The big guys are saying "If you want ot reach OUR customers, pay us", while
at the same time, telling thier customers "if you want to reach the
internet, pay us" - but I don't see anything telling thier customers "you
won't be able reach, or you'll have slow access to this list of sites unless
they pay us as well!".

Frankly, I'm all for letting anyone run thier network any way they wish.
But that the customer have protection, in the following manner... That any
ISP that engages in the practice outlined under #1, be required to disclose
that to thier customers, and that they have a publicly available list of all
"restricted" or "degraded" sites for anyone and everyone to examine at thier
leisure.And if they don't, thier customers can sue them.

This is a "consumer protection" law that is relatively non-intrusive, and
certainly doesn't restrict network operations.   In fact, it wouldn't be bad
to apply #2 and #3 partly to this kind of law, as well.   I don't think it
needs to be federal, certainly state laws are more than sufficient.

As a provider's association, WISPA should be issueing press releases and
lobbying to make this an informed debate and clear up some of the confusion
about "net neutrality" and to bring some clarity and clarity to the issues
brought up.


North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061
personal correspondence to:  mark at neofast dot net
sales inquiries to:  purchasing at neofast dot net
Fast Internet, NO WIRES!
----
-
- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net
neutrality


> I understood Charles post regarding net neutrality, that you summarized
also
> very clearly.
> My point is that Net Neutrality conflicts with other laws and regulations
as
> well.
> So voting for some thing for one reason, could also mean voting against it
> for another.
>
> For a strong Net NEtrality act, you'd aahve to allow FON, but for other
> leegal matters, you'd have to deny FON.  So it becomes a compflict of
which
> issue is more important to protect? Whcih has precidence?
>
> Thats what Congress and ISPs have to decide. Its not a right ro wrong
> answer. Its what answer has more (or more important) rights than wrongs?
>
> I think Home Land Security/Law inforcement/ Privacy advocates, and Net
> Neutrality experets really need to be ALL working on the Net neutrality
> issue together, because its all intertwined.  What I see happening is a
> bunch of conflicting regulations being passed, with out rtealizing it when
> getting voted on.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Sam Tetherow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 2:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net
> neutrality
>
>
> >I think what Charles is getting at is, is it legal for an ISP to place
the
> >'no open AP' or 'no sharing your connection' restriction on your service?
> >I have heard some people arguing the case that NN is "I'm paying for my
> >bandwidth so I can do what I want to with it".
> >
> >
> >Sam Tetherow
> >Sandhills Wireless
> >
> > Tom DeReggi wrote:
> >
> >> If it was, then it would be illegal to block hackers and criminals from
> >> using your network as well.
> >> As FON clearly has no concern for Acceptable Use Policiies

Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Tom DeReggi]

I understood Charles post regarding net neutrality, that you summarized also 
very clearly.
My point is that Net Neutrality conflicts with other laws and regulations as 
well.
So voting for some thing for one reason, could also mean voting against it 
for another.


For a strong Net NEtrality act, you'd aahve to allow FON, but for other 
leegal matters, you'd have to deny FON.  So it becomes a compflict of which 
issue is more important to protect? Whcih has precidence?


Thats what Congress and ISPs have to decide. Its not a right ro wrong 
answer. Its what answer has more (or more important) rights than wrongs?


I think Home Land Security/Law inforcement/ Privacy advocates, and Net 
Neutrality experets really need to be ALL working on the Net neutrality 
issue together, because its all intertwined.  What I see happening is a 
bunch of conflicting regulations being passed, with out rtealizing it when 
getting voted on.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Sam Tetherow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 2:13 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net 
neutrality



I think what Charles is getting at is, is it legal for an ISP to place the 
'no open AP' or 'no sharing your connection' restriction on your service? 
I have heard some people arguing the case that NN is "I'm paying for my 
bandwidth so I can do what I want to with it".



   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Tom DeReggi wrote:

If it was, then it would be illegal to block hackers and criminals from 
using your network as well.
As FON clearly has no concern for Acceptable Use Policiies, therefore 
illegal activity, and AUPs are clearly allowable and enforcable 
contracts.
 Strategically its a great time for FON to release their venture, to test 
the rules, the public, and ISPs.

 Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband

- Original Message -
*From:* Charles Wu <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*To:* 'WISPA General List' <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2006 10:32 AM
*Subject:* RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com <http://www.fon.com> - a threat
to us all? - back to net neutrality

out of curiosity (would like input from the pro net neutral
people) -- would blocking something like FON constitute a
violation of net neutrality?
 -Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com

-Original Message-
*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Rick Smith
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2006 8:41 AM
*To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
*Subject:* [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all?

 Anyone seen FON ?   This is insane.
 Anyone test one yet ?   I want to know what network their
hotspot runs back to, so I can block it
 Can someone that might have one throw a sniffer against it ?


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

!DSPAM:16,44a2c5c4194921117628507!



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Sam Tetherow]

I think what Charles is getting at is, is it legal for an ISP to place 
the 'no open AP' or 'no sharing your connection' restriction on your 
service?  I have heard some people arguing the case that NN is "I'm 
paying for my bandwidth so I can do what I want to with it".



   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Tom DeReggi wrote:

If it was, then it would be illegal to block hackers and criminals 
from using your network as well.
As FON clearly has no concern for Acceptable Use Policiies, therefore 
illegal activity, and AUPs are clearly allowable and enforcable contracts.
 
Strategically its a great time for FON to release their venture, to 
test the rules, the public, and ISPs.
 
Tom DeReggi

RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
 
 


- Original Message -
*From:* Charles Wu 
*To:* 'WISPA General List' 
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2006 10:32 AM
*Subject:* RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com  - a threat
to us all? - back to net neutrality

out of curiosity (would like input from the pro net neutral
people) -- would blocking something like FON constitute a
violation of net neutrality?
 
-Charles
 
 


---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com

-Original Message-
*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Rick Smith
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2006 8:41 AM
*To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
*Subject:* [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all?

 
Anyone seen FON ?   This is insane.
 
Anyone test one yet ?   I want to know what network their

hotspot runs back to, so I can block it
 
Can someone that might have one throw a sniffer against it ?
 
 



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

!DSPAM:16,44a2c5c4194921117628507! 



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Tom DeReggi]

Title: Message



If it was, then it would be illegal to block 
hackers and criminals from using your network as well.
As FON clearly has no concern for Acceptable Use 
Policiies, therefore illegal activity, and AUPs are clearly allowable and 
enforcable contracts.
 
Strategically its a great time for FON to release 
their venture, to test the rules, the public, and ISPs.
 
Tom DeReggiRapidDSL & Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless 
Broadband
 
 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Charles Wu 
  To: 'WISPA General List' 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 10:32 
  AM
  Subject: RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net 
  neutrality
  
  out 
  of curiosity (would like input from the pro net neutral people) -- would 
  blocking something like FON constitute a violation of net 
  neutrality?
   
  -Charles
   
   
  ---CWLabTechnology 
  Architectshttp://www.cwlab.com 
  

-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick 
SmithSent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 8:41 AMTo: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General ListSubject: [WISPA] www.fon.com 
- a threat to us all?
 
Anyone seen FON 
?   This is insane.
 
Anyone test one 
yet ?   I want to know what network their hotspot runs back to, so 
I can block it
 
Can someone that 
might have one throw a sniffer against it ?
 
 
  
  

  -- WISPA Wireless List: 
  wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: 
  http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Jonathan Schmidt]

Title: Message








It is pretty much precluded by Roadrunner’s
typical “Terms of Service” in their contract:

“(b) Subscriber will not resell the Service, or any portion
thereof, or otherwise charge others to use the Service, or any portion thereof.
The Service is for personal use only, and Subscriber agrees not to use the
Service for operation as an Internet Service Provider, to host web sites for
other parties or for any other business enterprise or to connect the Cable
modem to any server or to any computer
outside of the Subscriber's premises.”

 

Much more of the contract is available at: http://www.twcnc.com/road_runner/info/terms.cfm

 

. . . j o n a t h a n

 

 

 

 









From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Smith
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006
9:42 AM
To: WISPA
 General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com -
a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality



 

I still don't see why anyone should
be able to use my network without paying me for the right to do so. 
PERIOD.

 

I don't run a network for the benefit of
the free world, I run it for the benefit of my checkbook.  Which needs
SERIOUS help.  :)

 

OK, and while we're at it, why is
"net neutral" good ?   I admit I've ignored most of the
discussions on it due to the fact that I'm NOT a supporter.

 







From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006
10:32 AM
To: 'WISPA
 General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com -
a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality



out of curiosity (would like input from
the pro net neutral people) -- would blocking something like FON constitute a violation
of net neutrality?





 





-Charles





 





 



---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Rick Smith
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006
8:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a
threat to us all?



 





Anyone seen FON ?   This is insane.





 





Anyone test one yet ?   I want to know what network
their hotspot runs back to, so I can block it





 





Can someone that might have one throw a sniffer against it ?





 





 










-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Butch Evans]

On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, Rick Smith wrote:


OK, and while we're at it, why is "net neutral" good ?  I admit


The terminology here is somewhat confusing.  The term "net neutral" 
seems to be used to describe two unrelated ideologies (both of which 
are "bad", IMNSHO).  One is the opposite view to what AT&T (and 
others) are trying to push through Congress to allow them to charge 
certain content providers for premium access to their (AT&T's) 
customers.  The other is a "movement" by some to make it "bad" to do 
any shaping of any type of your network traffic.  Both are "whacko" 
ideas, IMO.


I've ignored most of the discussions on it due to the fact that I'm 
NOT a supporter.


I've not followed the discussions here very much, but I would agree 
with your assessment of the situation.


--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
573-276-2879
http://www.butchevans.com/
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
(http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html)
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Butch Evans]

On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, Charles Wu wrote:

out of curiosity (would like input from the pro net neutral people) 
-- would blocking something like FON constitute a violation of net 
neutrality?


I don't think you'll find many "pro net neutral people" on this 
list.  I would have to say that most of this group would say that 
blocking the FON network WOULD be a violation.  I seem to recall an 
effort to do something similar to this by some California group a 
while back.  I may be remembering wrong, but it sounds familiar. 
Either way, I bring them up, because I am remembering some 
discussions surrounding them and net neutrality.


FWIW, I think most ISPs would view something like FON as a misuse of 
their service.  There are many ISPs that may not have a written TOS 
(or don't have their customers sign a copy of their TOS).  I don't 
want to get into the legality of what FON is attempting to do, as 
that will take the discussion outside the area of expertise of most 
on this list.


--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
573-276-2879
http://www.butchevans.com/
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
(http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html)
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Rick Smith]

Title: Message



I still don't see why anyone should be able to use my 
network without paying me for the right to do so.  
PERIOD.
 
I don't run a network for the benefit of the free world, I 
run it for the benefit of my checkbook.  Which needs SERIOUS help.  
:)
 
OK, and while we're at it, why is "net neutral" good 
?   I admit I've ignored most of the discussions on it due to the fact 
that I'm NOT a supporter.


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles 
WuSent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 10:32 AMTo: 'WISPA 
General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - 
back to net neutrality

out of 
curiosity (would like input from the pro net neutral people) -- would blocking 
something like FON constitute a violation of net neutrality?
 
-Charles
 
 
---CWLabTechnology 
Architectshttp://www.cwlab.com 

  
  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
  Rick SmithSent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 8:41 AMTo: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General ListSubject: [WISPA] www.fon.com - 
  a threat to us all?
   
  Anyone seen FON 
  ?   This is insane.
   
  Anyone test one 
  yet ?   I want to know what network their hotspot runs back to, so I 
  can block it
   
  Can someone that 
  might have one throw a sniffer against it ?
   
   
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] www.fon.com - a threat to us all? - back to net neutrality

[Charles Wu]

Title: Message



out of 
curiosity (would like input from the pro net neutral people) -- would blocking 
something like FON constitute a violation of net neutrality?
 
-Charles
 
 
---CWLabTechnology 
Architectshttp://www.cwlab.com 

  
  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
  Rick SmithSent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 8:41 AMTo: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General ListSubject: [WISPA] www.fon.com - 
  a threat to us all?
   
  Anyone seen FON 
  ?   This is insane.
   
  Anyone test one 
  yet ?   I want to know what network their hotspot runs back to, so I 
  can block it
   
  Can someone that 
  might have one throw a sniffer against it ?
   
   
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/