Restricted Exit Policy Port Suggestions?

[Mike Perry]

Thus spake Mike Perry (mikeperry at fscked.org):

> Thus spake andrew at torproject.org (andrew at torproject.org):
>
> Yeah, unfortunately what this means in practice is "voting with your
> feet" and leaving ISPs that simply do not want to devote the staff and
> the stress to dealing with this spam for you, regardless of the law.
> 
> The problem is this drastically changes the effective market for
> bandwidth for Tor. Bandwidth costs are plummeting, and exit node
> operators (and thus the Tor network as a whole) are faced with a
> choice: you can pay less than $1/Mbit and go with an ISP that is less
> than ideal, but will still allow you to exit to most Internet
> services, or you put your foot down and end up moving your node every
> few months until you finally end up paying $20/Mbit with the RBN. 
> 
> Or, you shop around for non-US bandwidth.
> 
> Sometimes, you just need to pick your battles. If you believe the DMCA
> is bullshit and want a full exit policy, I think the practical answer
> is "Go outside the US for bandwidth". Or, be prepared to provider-hop
> for a good, long time.

Now, what we *should* be doing is turning on the default first, and
then reducing it back to the restriced policy *after* complaints
arrive and the ISP refuses the budge.

They are not going to cancel service immediately, and if you argue
with them for a bit, you can at least try to educate some people (and
maybe make it easier for the next relay they get). This is what I've
done with my nodes, and this is what Moritz did too. So far though,
ISPs have insisted that either bittorrent goes, or we go.


-- 
Mike Perry
Mad Computer Scientist
fscked.org evil labs
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/attachments/20100811/5583612f/attachment.pgp>