Hi all,
InternetNZ are working on a well-considered response and I do support
them, but I don't think they are the only organisation or group where
this should be discussed. Especially where operational decisions are
involved which may have downstream effects.
I agree with Peter and Michael; the argument that "it's just content" and that ISPs have no role in layer 8+ policy decisions is a bit disingenuous, because we regularly filter our customers from bad things. We run spam filters, we block malware sites, we choose to stop working with abusive customers; we (try to) make the internet a hostile place for bad people to operate. This isn't censorship--they can still get content online--we just don't make it easy for them.
Cloudflare have taken a commercial position based on a very US-centric "free speech" world view that they, effectively, shouldn't try to do any of this. Personally, I can understand their position, but I don't agree with it. Lacking any US amendment, the seemingly only way to change this commercial position is to apply commercial pressure, which is the point that Peter is making; is anyone considering operational changes to apply commercial pressure?
I know on the consumer side, at $DAYJOB we're looking at edge services. Cloudflare are of course one of the options. Based on my personal experience with my free account I was going to strongly back them, but their continued non-response to these events has made me reconsider that and my personal IT involvement with them.
Thanks,
Jed.