Don't be insulting Happy Gilmore. You said, "Certainly would not want someone to upgrade from a DS3 to an OC3 to "enhance internet traffic" from their site to me, or multi-home to make sure if one provider / line dies their site is still available. And forget about using load balancers, Content Distribution Networks, etc." Talk about silly! Ever notice why STANDARD (hint) upgrades are warranted, while not even remotely connected to the subject at hand? S-T-A-N-D-A-R-D-I-Z-E-D. We all can use our brains and tell the difference between standard upgrades and standard load-balancing, as defined by numerous RFCs, and non-standard, uninformed haphazard methodology! I made a point that basically said DI's unorthodoxed methodologies are not your choice (at least not until you discover them). You addressed that point by saying I misinterpreted that, that "using a gizmo was my choice" and I said that the difference is that one is a choice, your choice, the other is not. And I must also add that one affects only you while the other affects the entire Internet. Big difference, see it? Now take back that 'silly' comment! :) Marc -Trying to find the silliness... -----Original Message----- From: Patrick W. Gilmore [mailto:patrick@ianai.net] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 3:47 PM To: nanog@merit.edu; Quibell, Marc Subject: RE: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt At 03:29 PM 10/26/2001 -0500, Quibell, Marc wrote:

You said, "If I feel like using..(someone's) performance improving gizmo, it's my decision." The problem with this is, in the DI example, it is not your choice. I suppose if you're confortable with the idea of rogue companies trying to enhance internet traffic on their own, whether you agree with the methodology or not and giving you no choice, then that is your perogative.

Somehow I knew you would misinterpret what I said. Allow me to help you out a bit. You completely missed this part: <quote> And the IETF, IEEE, RFC-editor, NANOG, EFF, PTA, SPCA, or any other alphabet organization has nothing to say about it. (Assuming, of course, I am not violating standards, attacking people, etc.) [...] Unfortunately, it *MAY* be that DI is violating that "assuming, of course" part above. </quote> As for "rogue companies trying enhance internet traffic on their own", well, we better make sure everyone has the same routers, same transit provider, same BGP config, same web server software, etc., etc. Certainly would not want someone to upgrade from a DS3 to an OC3 to "enhance internet traffic" from their site to me, or multi-home to make sure if one provider / line dies their site is still available. And forget about using load balancers, Content Distribution Networks, etc. Marc, I have tried to be nice, but your replies just get more & more silly as time goes on. Please read the whole post & think before (if) you reply....

Marc

-- TTFN, patrick P.S. I wonder if Keynote has permission from every web page they test?