asterisk users - Jun 2005 - OT: Please comment on Dvorak's troll

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1812887,00.asp

Specifically, his assertion that ISP's would sniff traffic and block, say,
the SIP port. You could play wack-a-mole with port numbers, no? 

Also a community based, Freenet style of encryption implementation for
"free" VoIP traffic would address this issue. 

I raise this to the list because I'm sure there's a grain of truth in
what
he's saying. ILEC's would be crazy to not consider this kind of lock in,
since it's pretty obvious that packet voice networks are going to supplant
circuit networks completely in, say, 20 years. Maybe sooner.

The guy named himself after a keyboard (his pen name) and I have not
finished one of his articles in a while.

He is selling advertising though shock articles.  Here is another gem.
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:qtQlMzEk9AYJ:linux.slashdot.org/article.pl%3Fsid%3D05/02/25/162243%26tid%3D109%26tid%3D106+dvorak+site:slashdot.org&hl=en

I think you can safely discard this one too.

Dan

On 6/6/05, Colin Anderson <ColinA@landmarkmasterbuilder.com>
wrote:
> 
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1812887,00.asp
> 
> Specifically, his assertion that ISP's would sniff traffic and block,
say,
> the SIP port. You could play wack-a-mole with port numbers, no?
> 
> Also a community based, Freenet style of encryption implementation for
> "free" VoIP traffic would address this issue.
> 
> I raise this to the list because I'm sure there's a grain of truth
in what
> he's saying. ILEC's would be crazy to not consider this kind of
lock in,
> since it's pretty obvious that packet voice networks are going to
supplant
> circuit networks completely in, say, 20 years. Maybe sooner.
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Users mailing list
> Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>

The Slashdot guys are choked 'cause he was right about Intel and the Macs.
While I agree he sensationalizes I was looking for opinions on whether there
might be something to this ISP/ILEC attempt to control VoIP traffic. It's of
concern to me, since I have rolled out a substantial portion of our
company's PSTN traffic over the public Internet, and I am in Canada, where
everything is legislated and legislation is largely determined by lobbyists.
My default argument against any regulation is that I would not comply simply
because my company's VoIP traffic is tantamount to traffic on our internal
PBX and we can do whatever we want with it. However, I don't want to have to
be forced into doing something goofy like running IAX over port 80 because
some upstream provider is looking for a revenue grab. 

I'm just wondering if anyone in the community has considered "what
if" and
what would be a meaningful response, either technologically, legally, or
socially. Encryption comes to mind. Also, Dundi's RFC perhaps addresses some
of these issues by obsfucating centralized directories and might be modified
to encompass port number in order to force "bad" ISP's play
wack-a-port.

Just musing. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Littlejohn [mailto:dan.littlejohn@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 1:34 PM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] OT: Please comment on Dvorak's troll


The guy named himself after a keyboard (his pen name) and I have not
finished one of his articles in a while.

He is selling advertising though shock articles.  Here is another gem.
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:qtQlMzEk9AYJ:linux.slashdot.org/article
.pl%3Fsid%3D05/02/25/162243%26tid%3D109%26tid%3D106+dvorak+site:slashdot.org
&hl=en

I think you can safely discard this one too.

Dan

On 6/6/05, Colin Anderson <ColinA@landmarkmasterbuilder.com>
wrote:
> 
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1812887,00.asp
> 
> Specifically, his assertion that ISP's would sniff traffic and block,
say,
> the SIP port. You could play wack-a-mole with port numbers, no?
> 
> Also a community based, Freenet style of encryption implementation for
> "free" VoIP traffic would address this issue.
> 
> I raise this to the list because I'm sure there's a grain of truth
in what
> he's saying. ILEC's would be crazy to not consider this kind of
lock in,
> since it's pretty obvious that packet voice networks are going to
supplant
> circuit networks completely in, say, 20 years. Maybe sooner.
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Users mailing list
> Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>
_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Users mailing list
Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Brian, interesting comment.

Can you provide more information?

Do I understand from reading that this was settled outside of court
therefore no precedent was made?

Cheers,
Dean

> -----Original Message-----
> From: asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-
> bounces@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Brian Litzinger
> Sent: Monday, 6 June 2005 7:57 PM
> To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
> Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] OT: Please comment on Dvorak's troll
> 
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 03:03:49PM -0600, Colin Anderson wrote:
> > The Slashdot guys are choked 'cause he was right about Intel and
the
> Macs.
> > While I agree he sensationalizes I was looking for opinions on
whether
> there
> > might be something to this ISP/ILEC attempt to control VoIP traffic.
> It's of
> > concern to me, since I have rolled out a substantial portion of our
> > company's PSTN traffic over the public Internet, and I am in
Canada,
> where
> > everything is legislated and legislation is largely determined by
> lobbyists.
> > My default argument against any regulation is that I would not
comply
> simply
> > because my company's VoIP traffic is tantamount to traffic on our
> internal
> > PBX and we can do whatever we want with it. However, I don't want
to
> have to
> > be forced into doing something goofy like running IAX over port 80
> because
> > some upstream provider is looking for a revenue grab.
> >
> > I'm just wondering if anyone in the community has considered
"what
if"
> and
> > what would be a meaningful response, either technologically,
legally, or
> > socially. Encryption comes to mind. Also, Dundi's RFC perhaps
addresses
> some
> > of these issues by obsfucating centralized directories and might be
> modified
> > to encompass port number in order to force "bad" ISP's
play
wack-a-port.
> 
> I can muse about a real world experience.
> 
> I worked for company that distributed data via the Vertical Blanking
> Interval (VBI) of standard television signals. The company had local
> and nationwide converage through local and superstations including
> over-the-air and cable.
> 
> One day we starting getting calls from subscribers in New York that
> they were no longer getting data.
> 
> A cable operator they had come to understand our signal and blocked
> it with equipment at his head end.
> 
> I found it interesting he choose to block the signal and then wait
> for us to come calling.  We did talk with him and he had intentionally
> blocked our signal and was waiting to negotiate for his share of our
> proceeds.
> 
> It was an interesting area of contention where previous contracts to
> carry did not make clear what was to happen in this situation.
> 
> The New York cable company basically claimed their contractual
> obligation was only to the active video period.  In other words, their
> 'right-to-carry' (which they paid for) only covered the active
video
> period, rather than the entire video signal.
> 
> This area of uncertainty was clarified in later contracts.
> 
> --
> Brian Litzinger
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Users mailing list
> Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Unfortunately I believe there is a lot of truth to it.  The speed in 
which 911 legislation took effect is no coincidence and you don't see 
the big telcos complaining about it.  He's right about the price issue 
too.  Do you see how much big providers charge for VoIP service?

MARK.

Colin Anderson wrote:
>http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1812887,00.asp
>
>Specifically, his assertion that ISP's would sniff traffic and block,
say,
>the SIP port. You could play wack-a-mole with port numbers, no? 
>
>Also a community based, Freenet style of encryption implementation for
>"free" VoIP traffic would address this issue. 
>
>I raise this to the list because I'm sure there's a grain of truth
in what
>he's saying. ILEC's would be crazy to not consider this kind of lock
in,
>since it's pretty obvious that packet voice networks are going to
supplant
>circuit networks completely in, say, 20 years. Maybe sooner. 
>_______________________________________________
>Asterisk-Users mailing list
>Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com
>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>  
>

On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 11:17:20 -0600, Colin Anderson wrote:
>
>http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1812887,00.asp
>
>Specifically, his assertion that ISP's would sniff traffic and block,
say,
>the SIP port. You could play wack-a-mole with port numbers, no? 
>
>Also a community based, Freenet style of encryption implementation for
>"free" VoIP traffic would address this issue. 
>
>I raise this to the list because I'm sure there's a grain of truth
in what
>he's saying. ILEC's would be crazy to not consider this kind of lock
in,
>since it's pretty obvious that packet voice networks are going to
supplant
>circuit networks completely in, say, 20 years. Maybe sooner. 
Actually, Bob Cringley, another pundit found on the PBS web site raised
this matter a few weeks ago. I suspect that IAX2 with some encryption
could port hop around and not be easily tracked as VOIP traffic. But in
any case there has to be some regulatory stance on what is permitted
over a network. Certainly there are non-telco carriers like Covad, whom
I use, that would not concern themselves about the nature of the
traffic.

Michael

--
Michael Graves                           mgraves@pixelpower.com
Sr. Product Specialist                          www.pixelpower.com
Pixel Power Inc.                                 mgraves@mstvp.com

o713-861-4005
o800-905-6412
c713-201-1262