Slashdot Mirror
Vonage's CEO Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship'
Avantare writes "CEO of leading VoIP provider says port blocking of VoIP traffic is one potential small step toward an unwanted future of IP-based censorship.
According to Vonage Holdings Corp. CEO Jeffrey Citron, intentional blocking of Voice over IP traffic is more than just a competitive dirty trick -- it's an act of censorship against free speech.
In an exclusive interview here Tuesday [March 1], Vonage's chief executive said the issue of the company's recent incident of having some VoIP traffic blocked reaches beyond the market for IP-based voice communications and into the realm of free speech -- and as such, should be protected by the courts, the FCC, or by new telecom regulation that ensures free and open access over the Internet."
Only governments censor. This would be anti-competitive. Semantics, yes, but an important distiction nonetheless.
I'm done, carry forward with the conversation.
blenderking.com over 50,000 blenders can't be wrong
http://www.rt.com/man/portmap.8.html
Right not in DNS, but rather the host service.
Maybe we should just IPSec wrap all communications.
BIND 9 and the DNS server portion of Microsoft Active Directory(TM) already have this - they're call srv records. Check the RFC or see for yourself here.
Soko
"Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
You might be a good person, and on the side of the public concern...
But that dosen't change my opinion that all lobbyists should be herded up and whacked with a giant fly-swatter.
It's called a Well Known Service record (WKS). Actually, rfc 1033 defines the WKS a little differently from what you've purposed. Either way, the whole concept would only make blocking a given port harder, not impossible. If the world can read your DNS records to determine which port the services they need are on, so can your ISP.
VoIP packet blocking/tagging is the subject of Cringely's latest column .
Authenticated SMTP on Port 587 Is your friend, even better if it is on a Server that supports Start TLS so you can encrypt it. We block outgoing (25) from any of our dynamic ranges as it cuts down on the crap that comes from the owned boxes in Terms of Direct to MX spam and Virii. I use this setup on my laptop and have had no problems going between cafe's, hotel's etc...
To E-mail me, replace the first period in my domain with an @
The difference is role. The ISP's job is to give you a chunk of raw bandwith. You can send data to, and recieve data on any port you like so long as you're not doing something malicious, idiotic, or illegal. That's what the customers signed up for, so that's what they should get.
Only in a Slashdot fantasy can a Slackware install turn into several hours of sex . . . . .
That would add up to about 120kbps, far less than even a quarter of a t1.
voip is not a bandwidth hog by any means, in the space of ONE user listening to a 128kbps streaming mp3 station you can cram 15 calls.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
Telco agrees to stop blocking VoIP calls
The article can be found here