On 7/21/06, ashok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
but would indian users have been able to access the blogs if they had
switched their dns settings to those of an accessible dns server
outside the country? (provided of course the ip address was not
being blocked...)
This leads us to the classic example of a draconian measure spiralling
into more and more draconian measures. You are right. The user could
easily configure their DNSes to talk to other upstream DNSes that are
not those of the ISPs. It does affect performance a little bit. I
would guess that this would be done by the more clueful users.
Funnily, in India, the authorities are not worried about completenes
in blocking off. Historically, there have always been a handful who
have, through their soci-economic positions in society, flouted
whatever was being banned from them. The government is content with
just being able to control what a majority sees/hears/reads. The
problem arises in the case of internet access because it is a more
democratic medium with lower barriers to access. In such a case, a
wider set of people than usual would be able to get around the ban.
If a large enough set of people got around the ban, the ISPs can
excalate the conflict. They could block all tcp and udp traffic
through their pipes going to the DNS servers that are not owned by
them.
Thaths
--
"Marge, anyone could miss Canada, all tucked away down there."
-- Homer J. Simpson
Sudhakar Chandra Slacker Without Borders
