[67647] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Anti-spam System Idea
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tim Wilde)
Sun Feb 15 22:35:09 2004
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 22:32:59 -0500 (EST)
From: Tim Wilde <twilde@dyndns.org>
To: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0402152059460.24335@clifden.donelan.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Sun, 15 Feb 2004, Sean Donelan wrote:
> "Most" ISPs prohibit any type of server on a DHCP connection?
>
> Some cable providers do this due to some limitations in their network
> architecture, but I would be surprised if "most" (i.e. more than 50%) ISPs
> prohibit servers. Why do you think DynDNS type services are so popular?
> So people can run servers on DHCP addresses. Peer-to-Peer is a very
> popular server used on mostly dynamic addresses.
Just because they're using our services doesn't mean their AUP doesn't say
they're not supposed to. Charter and Comcast, two pretty good-sized cable
MSOs, at least up here in the northeast, both prohibit not only any type
of server, but the connection of any LAN/WAN that they don't operate.
I'm pretty sure Verizon DSL prohibits any servers, though I don't think
they explicitly ban LANs. (I guess that means I've violated the AUP of
every provider I've used at home. Whoops.) Forget about servers being
prohibited, their AUPs even prohibit the use of those ever-so-popular NAT
routers Linksys, D-Link, Netgear, and friends like to spew out. Does that
stop people from buying and using them, though? Hell no.
I think the statement that most ISPs, oriented towards home use, anyway,
prohibit servers is accurate. However, it isn't necessarily /relevant/,
because I don't think many of them actively enforce that policy.
Tim Wilde
--
Tim Wilde
twilde@dyndns.org
Systems Administrator
Dynamic Network Services, Inc.
http://www.dyndns.org/
