[KLUG Advocacy] Here's a Frightening One: Michigan to Outlaw VPNs?

[Adam Tauno Williams]

>I, also, am not a lawyer.  But my POV on this is that if you are  
>knowingly misleading the telecommunications companies, then their are  
>now legal ramifications and not just the wrath of the telecommunication  

There were/are already lots of legal ramifications to knowingly misleading a
carrier.

>companies.  I use NAT/MASQ (as you put it) on my home network and at  

I think this is an attempt to extend to IP packet switched networks the same
provisions that apply to switched circuit networks.  Of course, the problem here
is that they are fundamentally different entities.  The ability to hide and
obscure is one of the FEATURES of packet switched networks, and used by just
about everyone including the gov'mnt.

I've glanced at this and it seems really vague, clearly drafted by someone
without much understanding of how a packet switched network works.