I would suggest European networks have quite different content than elsewhere as a result of local censorship laws and other rights afforded to people in the region. Jared Mauch > On Apr 10, 2016, at 10:48 AM, Michael StJohns <mstjohns@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 4/10/2016 10:45 AM, Randy Bush wrote: >>>> it was clean unfettered Internet. some local folk stuck their necks out >>>> very far to accomplish this. it was definitely different than one got >>>> outside of the ietf meeting network. this has been a condition placed >>>> on hosts and beijing was no exception. >>> This surprises me - "this has been a condition placed on hosts...". >> it was even in the hour of embarrassing babble fred used to prevent >> people from talking about real problems at the bof >> >>> Could you enlighten us as to which [and I'll try to be precise here] >>> other IETFs had a condition where the content accessible by the IETF >>> network was markedly different from the content of say the network at >>> a local Starbuck's equivalent wifi hot spot just down the street from >>> the IETF and where that was mandated by the hosts and/or local laws? >>> I mean besides Beijing? Key words "markedly different" and "content >>> accessible". >> we don't specify it's 'different'. among other silly distractions, it >> would require a 'different from precisely what and in what ways?' >> >> we simply specifiy open and unfettered > > I repeat - "where" have the local hosts/laws specified conditions that resulted in the IETF network content access being markedly different than that accessible to the random local citizen? > > >> >> rndy