This is a misleading statement. ISP's (Common carriers) do not provide a knowingly
I'm trying to remember when ISP's became common carriers...
illegal offering, ... TOR exit/entrance nodes provide only the former.
This is also a misleading statement. Explain the difference between a consumer ISP selling you a cable Internet plan knowing that NN% of the traffic will be data with questionable copyright status, and 1 of of 5 or so will be a botted box doing other illegal stuff, and a TOR node providing transit knowing that NN% will be similarly questionable etc etc etc.
Great point. The question might also revolve around this issue, restored from the previous msg:
AND they do provide the PHYSICAL infrastructure for packets to be passed and interconnected to other PHYSICAL networks.
Well, an ISP does do that, but so does an end user's network. So if I put a Tor node on an ethernet ("PHYSICAL infrastructure") and then connect that to an ISP ("other PHYSICAL networks"), that doesn't make for a real good way to differentiate between an ISP, a commercial ISP customer who gets routed IP networks via BGP, or an end user who has an ethernet behind a NAT gateway. ... JG -- Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net "We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN) With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.