On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 19:40:51 +0100 Martyn Drake martyn@drake.org.uk allegedly wrote:
On 5 September 2010 19:31, mick mbm@rlogin.net wrote:
I feel I should mention that memset are the only UK based ISP I have approached who declined to let me run a tor node. They were polite, but clearly didn't want any possible hassle.
I can't comment on that - was not involved in that decision or process at all. And also can't comment on individual circumstances either, not without permission from my employers. All I can say is that we don't turn down requests lightly without good reason.
Regards,
Martyn
Martyn
Wasn't a criticism, merely an observation. As I said, the response I received to my query (from "Nathan") was polite, but in the negative.
Many ISPs take the view that encrypted traffic tunneled through their infrastructure may cause them grief. In the US in particular, operating a tor exit node (as do I) can attract all sorts of unwelcome attention such as DMCA takedown notices. As advised by the tor community, I specifically post a notice on my tor nodes (see http://toroftheworld.aibohphobia.org ) which explains what tor is about.
I have not had one complaint in nearly 18 months of tor operation.
Mick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this?
Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------