Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ITU Approves Deep Packet Inspection Recommendation

itu.int

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 161 posts

Re: ITU Approves Deep Packet Inspection Recommendation

#151

Post by politician »

jholman wrote: post #96
politician wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia says, "In computer networking and computer science, the words bandwidth, network bandwidth, data bandwidth, or digital bandwidth are terms used to refer to various bit-rate measures, representing the available or consumed data communication resources expressed in bits per second or multiples of it (bit/s, kbit/s, Mbit/s, Gbit/s, etc.)." All else being equal, increasing the denominator reduces the rate. It's…

And it's the wrong math. You claim that increasing latency will necessarily decrease bandwidth, and that is simply not the case. If we assume that there are a fixed number of packets in flight at any given time, and we increase the flight time of all packets, then it will be true that the packets-processed-per-time will drop (and ceteris paribus that the bandwidth would drop). This assumption, however, is incorrect.…

You're right, I said something silly and invalid. What I was trying to say was simply that an in-series DPI implementation will increase round trip times and decrease bandwidth.

My personal understanding of DPI is that they want to do it in-series so as to be able to reset TCP connections immediately upon detecting a hit, but that might not be how they do it.

Re: ITU Approves Deep Packet Inspection Recommendation

#152

Post by jrogers65 »

Nrsolis wrote: post #148
jrogers65 wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody is trying to get citizenship in the west because the west has destroyed half of the world. Read about why your country (and the west in general) is so rich in the first place. Read about why places like the DRC and Latin American countries are so poor and conflicted. All of this prosperity is built on the blood, sweat and tears of countless people. All empires are the same - rotten at the core. So it was wi…

You're talking to someone who has parents from Central America and Germany. Believe me when I say that there is so much blame to go around, it's unlikely that any unbiased reading of history would place it SOLELY at the hands of the west. I'm well acquainted with the history of the world and my point still stands: the oppression of the "other" is a HUMAN problem, not a USA/West problem. As long as there are people, t…

> it's unlikely that any unbiased reading of history would place it SOLELY at the hands of the west.

You are responding to a point that I did not argue. I asserted that in the context of recent history and current events, the west, and the US in particular, has done inordinate amounts of damage. I did not claim anything more than that. I did not state that they are the only ones causing damage, just that they are currently the most effective at it. This was in response to:

> I'd put our record up against that of any other nation in the world. ANY nation. Look hard enough at everyone else and you'll find all the reason you need to hate their countries too.

Re: ITU Approves Deep Packet Inspection Recommendation

#153

Post by flyinRyan »

npsimons wrote: post #136
flyinRyan wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't disagree more. Every good person should avoid working with evil systems. We should also excommunicate any people who do work with evil from our circle as best we can so they can't grow as well in their profession.

We should also excommunicate any people who do work with evil from our circle as best we can so they can't grow as well in their profession. And by doing that, you ensure they will continue to "work with evil systems" because they will never be able to change jobs.

So what? What's your proposal: do nothing because that's the high road, right? Right now doing evil pays pretty good. So long as there is financial incentive to do it and absolutely no downside, why would anyone stop?

Re: ITU Approves Deep Packet Inspection Recommendation

#154

Post by flyinRyan »

Nrsolis wrote: post #149
flyinRyan wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't disagree more. Every good person should avoid working with evil systems. We should also excommunicate any people who do work with evil from our circle as best we can so they can't grow as well in their profession.

LOL. I'm assuming you're the authority on what constitutes "evil" right? You are essentially advocating a fascist viewpoint: either you agree with us, or we crush you.

Your comment is absurd. Every country has laws and if you break those laws you will be "crushed". Is the very law itself "a fascist viewpoint"? Please put more thought into your commenting as responding to this sort of nonsense is tedious.

Re: ITU Approves Deep Packet Inspection Recommendation

#155

Post by [deleted] »

Nrsolis wrote: post #149
flyinRyan wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't disagree more. Every good person should avoid working with evil systems. We should also excommunicate any people who do work with evil from our circle as best we can so they can't grow as well in their profession.

LOL. I'm assuming you're the authority on what constitutes "evil" right? You are essentially advocating a fascist viewpoint: either you agree with us, or we crush you.

[deleted]

Re: ITU Approves Deep Packet Inspection Recommendation

#156

Post by Nrsolis »

flyinRyan wrote: post #154
Nrsolis wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LOL. I'm assuming you're the authority on what constitutes "evil" right? You are essentially advocating a fascist viewpoint: either you agree with us, or we crush you.

Your comment is absurd. Every country has laws and if you break those laws you will be "crushed". Is the very law itself "a fascist viewpoint"? Please put more thought into your commenting as responding to this sort of nonsense is tedious.

I'd ask you to go back and consider the definition of a "just" law.

You just suggested that people who work on "evil" systems be "excommunicated". Exactly how do you do that in the context of a functioning legal system without the involvement of a substantial majority of the people who would have to live under a system.

To me, it sounds like your argument is that the laws of the USA dont meet your liking, even though those laws are developed as a result of a democratic process. You're arguing against your own point, which sounds like nonsensical thinking to me.

Re: ITU Approves Deep Packet Inspection Recommendation

#157

Post by ripperdoc »

guessWhy wrote: post #122
ripperdoc wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that a kind of sender-pays is already used in practice as all big content providers pay for CDN on a per GB basis, and the CDN company in turn pays for bandwidth.

Sure, but this was the case before CDNs as well. Unless you are a Tier 1 network you usually pay a fee to your upstream carrier. However, the ITU would like to charge across many networks and discriminate based on the type of service provided. So if data from your network A reaches the customer through networks B, C and finally D, then D would like to charge you to deliver it and not slow down things artificially.

But that is what CDNs do. A content provider, such as Apple, will pay both for their upstream carrier access, AND for the CDN access. And the CDN will effectively pay each network on the way to the destination, by renting their lines and hosting servers at their PoPs. CDN is a QoS service, it's just that the access networks feel they aren't getting part of that cake.

Re: ITU Approves Deep Packet Inspection Recommendation

#158

Post by flyinRyan »

Nrsolis wrote: post #156
flyinRyan wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment is absurd. Every country has laws and if you break those laws you will be "crushed". Is the very law itself "a fascist viewpoint"? Please put more thought into your commenting as responding to this sort of nonsense is tedious.

I'd ask you to go back and consider the definition of a "just" law. You just suggested that people who work on "evil" systems be "excommunicated". Exactly how do you do that in the context of a functioning legal system without the involvement of a substantial majority of the people who would have to live under a system. To me, it sounds like your argument is that the laws of the USA dont meet your liking, even though…

You were basically saying that holding people accountable is "fascist". We are in a situation where bad people want to do immoral things and pay well for it. There's no downside. The government isn't going to make a downside because they are the bad people so it's up to us. If no one does anything we're going to find our internet locked down and every aspect of our lives being monitored.

Re: ITU Approves Deep Packet Inspection Recommendation

#159

Post by Nrsolis »

jrogers65 wrote: post #152
Nrsolis wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're talking to someone who has parents from Central America and Germany. Believe me when I say that there is so much blame to go around, it's unlikely that any unbiased reading of history would place it SOLELY at the hands of the west. I'm well acquainted with the history of the world and my point still stands: the oppression of the "other" is a HUMAN problem, not a USA/West problem. As long as there are people, t…

> it's unlikely that any unbiased reading of history would place it SOLELY at the hands of the west. You are responding to a point that I did not argue. I asserted that in the context of recent history and current events, the west, and the US in particular, has done inordinate amounts of damage. I did not claim anything more than that. I did not state that they are the only ones causing damage, just that they are cur…

Really? China has a pretty good run going so far. How many Chinese people were imprisoned/starved during the cultural revolution? Have you taken a look at Central/South America lately? Don't even get me started on Africa.

I'd challenge you to consider the following thought experiment: if any other nation in the world was currently the sole military and economic superpower in the world, which one would you choose and why? Whose record would you suggest makes them a better candidate for that role?

Re: ITU Approves Deep Packet Inspection Recommendation

#160

Post by abecedarius »

Nrsolis wrote: post #127
abecedarius wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the question was not why the ISP would conform to CALEA instead of breaking it; it was why you as a programmer would take on the job of providing a snooping system, instead of some other job that does not need a lot of explanation about why it's actually not really so bad. There are reasonable answers to this, but I think it's a fair question. (I don't agree that 'we' should pursue criminals (or suspects) using a…

So your argument is that I should not be a part of this system? Because you don't agree with it? As a person interested in PRIVACY and LAW and INTENRET TECHNOLOGY, who would you think I'd rather have working on this type of system? Someone else? Or myself: a person who knows what his motivations are, who knows what the laws are, who knows what the implications for others are, and who wants to see things done properly…

In order:

As I said, there are reasonable answers, and I'm ignorant of your life, but if you want my view: you should not be part of that system, not because I disagree with it, but because it's wrong. I acknowledge that I may be wrong to think so. "Oh, you think so?" is a distraction from any actual points at issue.

If you've pushed back against particular acts of snooping, then thank you for that. I did not know you're personally involved in particular acts; that's a different moral question than writing an automated system. Note that "better you have ME" is what you'd expect Nazi collaborators to say. You're not a Nazi collaborator, but it shows the at-best ambiguous advantages of this sort of involvement.

Most people trust their own judgement. According to Dunning/Kruger that's weak evidence of a problem rather than positive evidence you're doing good.

In Feynman's autobio he said he regretted keeping at work on the bomb after the Nazis went down. They were all so invested by that point it didn't even occur to them to quit. IIRC that was part of why he chose to turn down work for the feds in general over the rest of his career.

Post reply on HN