I would suggest European networks have quite different content than elsewhere
as a result of local censorship laws and other rights afforded to people in the
region.
Jared Mauch
On Apr 10, 2016, at 10:48 AM, Michael StJohns
<mstjohns(_at_)comcast(_dot_)net> wrote:
On 4/10/2016 10:45 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
it was clean unfettered Internet. some local folk stuck their necks out
very far to accomplish this. it was definitely different than one got
outside of the ietf meeting network. this has been a condition placed
on hosts and beijing was no exception.
This surprises me - "this has been a condition placed on hosts...".
it was even in the hour of embarrassing babble fred used to prevent
people from talking about real problems at the bof
Could you enlighten us as to which [and I'll try to be precise here]
other IETFs had a condition where the content accessible by the IETF
network was markedly different from the content of say the network at
a local Starbuck's equivalent wifi hot spot just down the street from
the IETF and where that was mandated by the hosts and/or local laws?
I mean besides Beijing? Key words "markedly different" and "content
accessible".
we don't specify it's 'different'. among other silly distractions, it
would require a 'different from precisely what and in what ways?'
we simply specifiy open and unfettered
I repeat - "where" have the local hosts/laws specified conditions that
resulted in the IETF network content access being markedly different than
that accessible to the random local citizen?
rndy