I think the general thinking is that WISP's shouldn't have to pay to make the 
Governments' job easier...


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sam Tetherow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, June 5, 2006 11:29 AM
>To: 'WISPA General List'
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Why's WISPA silent about this? 2 diferent issues at hand
>I want to preface this email with the statement that I ABSOLUTELY DO NOT 
>support this law, it is an invasion of privacy and places an undue 
>burden of responsibility on an ISP.
>Now that being said, as I read the article, and as some have pointed out 
>the information being requested for archive is merely websites visited 
>and email address sent to. This information is trivial to gather and 
>really not that burdensome to archive. I currently run about 4Mbps-5Mbps 
>of traffic from 8am to midnight and a months worth of these logs 
>uncompressed only takes up about 7G of space. Compression will save me 
>60% of that so it is more like 3G for a month of 4-5Mbps. This fits 
>nicely on a single DVD-R for achiving once a month. Even scaling this up 
>to 30X the traffic for a DVD/day gets you 120-150Mbps daily average traffic.
>Your total cost on something like this would be
>1. a Mikrotik box (or any router that supports the netflow protocol) to 
>sit right before your edge router (or as your edge router).
>2. A PC to capture the data with a DVD+-R drive total cost < $500.
>3. And then a spindle of DVD media at ~ $15/100 DVDs.
>This puts the grand total in at well under $2000 one time cost and then 
>whatever personnel cost you want to assign to burning a DVD once a 
>month, or if you are lucky enough to have enough customers to require 
>120Mbps, once a day.
>I think it is important if we are going to draft something up to address 
>this issue that we address it with facts. For most ISPs coming up with 
>the money to achieve this while a PITA is not going to cause the 
>business to go bankrupt. I achieved this using equipment I already have 
>in place. My DS3 MT router sends the netflow data to the box I use for 
>system/network monitoring. I currently do not archive this data to DVD 
>because I have only been collecting it for a month, but I highly doubt I 
>will unless required to by law. The only reason I collect this data is 
>for IP accounting and troubleshooting and will probably keep no more 
>than a month or two of the full data. But it sure comes in handy when a 
>customer calls up and says that they haven't had internet for the past 2 
>weeks and I can pull up the charts that show they have. Or they say that 
>things have been running real slow lately and I can look at the flow 
>data and see that their kids have been using P2P applications or doing 
>large FTP downloads.
>Sam Tetherow
>Sandhills Wireless
>Butch Evans wrote:
>> On Sun, 4 Jun 2006, George Rogato wrote:
>>> 1) Does the government have a right to know the actions of Americans 
>>> on the internet?
>> This is not really at issue. At least it is not really of any concern 
>> for us here.
>>> 2) Is this a responsibility of the ISP to bear the burden of 
>>> gathering this information or should the burden be carried by the 
>>> feds themselves with little or no cost to the ISP?
>> THIS is the real issue that ISPs face. The problem that we all have 
>> with this is multifaceted. First, (and perhaps most importantly) is 
>> the cost that many ISPs will face to comply with the requirements. In 
>> many cases, this cost will be both direct (for hardware) and indirect 
>> (network reconfiguration). Also, many ISPs are set up in such a way 
>> that compliance will be nearly impossible. Let me provide just a 
>> couple examples.
>> First, many ISPs use private IP space internally for their customers. 
>> For these ISPs, any monitoring done by an outside entity (i.e. AT&T) 
>> will be completely useless.
>> Another example, would be the many ISPs that have several diverse 
>> networks. I have several customers that have 3 or 4 distinct networks 
>> (one has 8). These ISPs would be required to store this data in either 
>> one location, or purchase the equipment for each network.
>> It is my belief that WISPA should create a stance against any 
>> requirement for WISPs to store customer traffic patterns for any 
>> period. The very idea is hideously un-American in the first place. Be 
>> that as it may, it is technically difficult, and financially unfair 
>> for many smaller ISPs to have to store this information at all.
>>> This thread started out as we should not be allowing the government 
>>> to know our every move. This is a political discussion that can not 
>>> and should not be decided by an ISP, but rather the entire country. 
>>> We don't have any jurisdiction on issues such as this.
>> George, this is one area where we disagree. This is NOT a "political 
>> discussion". This is an issue that directly impacts every ISP 
>> (wireless or wired). It is, perhaps, true that the political 
>> implications are what Mark was driving at, but the issue at hand is 
>> NOT political in nature. It IS financial and technical.
>>> We do however have a right to contest who is responsible for the 
>>> burden of gathering this information.
>> OK. If that is the case, wouldn't you agree that this is something 
>> that SHOULD be addressed by WISPA? I don't agree with much that Mark 
>> had to say (really, it was the "implications" he made that I disagreed 
>> with), but his point that there should be SOME action on the part of 
>> WISPA is one that I do agree with.
>   Sam Tetherow
>   Sandhills Wireless
>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


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

Reply via email to