Filtering by the name of moral is simply immoral.

Filtering is basically to create a kindergarten for kids as well as adults. Do we adults need to be contained in such kindergarten?

I very, very, very strong suspect (note that I’m not saying “know” or “will”!) that only ISPs who provide end point connectivity services will be required to filter requests from those services. Thus my point about “within their network” vs. “egress” in one of my comments above… certainly larger ISPs would tend away from doing anything like this at egress.

No one would want to do it, no one would choose to do it, and no one would accept legislation which demanded it.

In my first comment I said that the “Google crawler doesn’t appear to have any nodes in Australia”… but it doesn’t matter anyway -> any Google request to a hosting facility is obviously an incoming connection, not outgoing.

Matt’s wrong because they’ve already demonstrated methodology in the technical report… and there is a big difference between making a TCP connection beyond your network and receiving a TCP connection into your network. They’re not the same thing, and you wouldn’t apply proxy or DNS hacks in the same way.

This should be really easy to grasp: No one’s going to filter at ingress, and I very strongly doubt that they’d be asked to (ie. that the legislation would demand so).

Also, why would “Google crawler requests coming from Australia hit Australian hosting facilities at an (unfiltered) ingress“? Not trying to be funny here, just don’t understand.

Websinthe, I agree this is far from the most important objection to the filter. However this post came about because I’m unconvinced by Mr Tampling’s assessment.

Matt, thanks for your comment. That’s what I was thinking.

So again, this is purely speculative and highly unlikely — putting “WILL” in your title is at best incorrect, at worst deceptive.

I think my record speaks to my hatred of this legislation, but as Jeff pointed out, publishing problems that are wrong take bandwidth away from the valid arguments.

How if the filter is doing something like a BGP redirect this might not be an issue.

As you said we’ve got no idea how they are going to do this, which is really scary cause we can’t comment on it because “they haven’t said how they’ll do it yet” but they’re keeping that detail secret.

So, you’re saying that there’s an unfiltered “back-door” to be used by the googlebot, and presumably, overseas visitors to Australian websites?