Re: Bind Problem : Another kind of idea !
On Sat, Sep 18, 1999 at 09:44:54PM +0200, Sami Dalouche wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've seen that bind will become a problem in its future releases,
> so, I'm now thinking that the non-US division is really stupid !
> Why not syncing non-US and main ?? Only because this <sometimes stupid>
> policy forbit it ?
> So, let's change it !
>
> I think the last US export restriction laws would arrange that, and even if
> it doesn't arrange that, it's not a problem ! Why would tons of americans be
> privated of a BIND in main, because of other countries's laws ?
>
> THe packages that are in non-US should only contain a warning in their
> description and the admin would be responsible for installing packages that
> are forbidden by some countries ! I don't think debian should be privated of
> the right to have a good dns server in the main section !
>
> Maybe this idea is stupid, but if you don't convince me, I'll continue to
> think that this part of the policy is stupid !
Sami, the reason is more than silly software patents like this. It is also
the silly federal government we have here in the states. (Don't get me
wrong, they do some useful things... but this is sheer stupidity at its
finest.. :)
It is TREASON for an american to export cryptography of any decent strength.
Yup. The reason why we need a non-us section is so that strong crypto can be
given to everyone else in the world without hassle, but no one within the
united states runs the risk of going to prison (do we still execute people
for treason? Last one I heard of was about fourty years ago...) -- and
everyone in the world has the benefit of easy-to-get-to strong cryptography.
I think we need it a while longer, at least until the silly feds drop the
ITAR laws. (Maybe even longer, for software patent reasons?)
--
Seth Arnold | http://www.willamette.edu/~sarnold/
Hate spam? See http://maps.vix.com/rbl/ for help
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into
your ~/.signature to help me spread!
Reply to: