I'm killing this thread. Originally, I figured someone else will or
already has run into the same situation as Scott. And said someone may
have advice on how to work with the ISP.
However, the thread has devolved. It's dead. Move on.
Thanks.
--
Andrew Lewman
The Tor Project
pgp 0x31B0974B
On Tue, 2009-08-11 at 12:38 +0200, Niels Elgaard Larsen wrote:
> Scott Bennett wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 01:10:41 -0400 Ted Smith
> > wrote:
>
> >> You're conveniently ignoring countries like Sweden, Iceland, Estonia,
> >> where "socialist" Internet policies have resulted in some of the
On Tue, 2009-08-11 at 12:38 +0200, Niels Elgaard Larsen wrote:
> Scott Bennett wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 01:10:41 -0400 Ted Smith
> > wrote:
>
> >> You're conveniently ignoring countries like Sweden, Iceland, Estonia,
> >> where "socialist" Internet policies have resulted in some of the
I'm on the list, Scott, you don't need send the message twice.
On Tue, 2009-08-11 at 01:43 -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 01:10:41 -0400 Ted Smith
> wrote:
> >On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 23:55 -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
> >> On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:33:10 -0400 Ted Smith
> >> wrote:
Scott Bennett wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 01:10:41 -0400 Ted Smith
> wrote:
>> You're conveniently ignoring countries like Sweden, Iceland, Estonia,
>> where "socialist" Internet policies have resulted in some of the best
>> environments of digital freedom. In fact, your list appears only t
*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(r) Pro*
Last fall I sat through the whole day public FCC hearing on Comcast's
outrageous behavior to P2P traffic (and presumably other traffic, too, but
that was the biggie) held at Harvard Law School.
Things started LATE beca
> How would slower speeds avoid Comcast's port scans?
Wouldn't. But since you said you saw them scanning you, fine... logon
to a route server, look up the asn of that address and anything else
comcast related, grab all their cidr blocks and sink the whole pile of
them on your packet filter. T
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 01:10:41 -0400 Ted Smith
wrote:
>On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 23:55 -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:33:10 -0400 Ted Smith
>> wrote:
>> >On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 12:28 -0700, Martin Fick wrote:
>> >> If they couldn't do this, to stay competitive, they=3D20
>> >
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 07:54:22 +0300 "Robas, Teodor"
wrote:
>> As you can see proxies are specifically named;
>> say bye to your Tor relay under Comcast residential contract.
>
>I would say it is still possible to run it, but at low speed ... you
>know, fly below the radar.
>
How would s
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:48:10 -0400 Ted Smith
wrote:
>To: or-talk@freehaven.net
>Cc: or-t...@seul.org
Ted, please stop doing that. Only one copy of each message need be
posted to the list.
>On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 13:22 -0700, Martin Fick wrote:
>> A right is something someone should not be a
Jon, Martin, et al.: please stop double-posting. There is only
one or-talk mailing list, even though it has two addresses.
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:04:05 + Jon Cosby wrote:
>On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 13:22 -0700, Martin Fick wrote:
>> A right is something someone should not be able to
>
On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 23:55 -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:33:10 -0400 Ted Smith
> wrote:
> >On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 12:28 -0700, Martin Fick wrote:
> >> If they couldn't do this, to stay competitive, they=20
> >> would charge more money for everyone and you would=20
> >> suffe
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:33:10 -0400 Ted Smith
wrote:
>On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 12:28 -0700, Martin Fick wrote:
>> If they couldn't do this, to stay competitive, they=20
>> would charge more money for everyone and you would=20
>> suffer more. Cheap internet access and "serving" is=20
>> not some i
As you can see proxies are specifically named;
say bye to your Tor relay under Comcast residential contract.
I would say it is still possible to run it, but at low speed ... you
know, fly below the radar.
--
_
ASCII ribbon campaign ( )
- against HTML email X
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:09:23 -0400 Praedor Atrebates
wrote:
>On Monday 10 August 2009 02:55:13 pm Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>> > business-class service, but it seems unlikely to be any cheaper.
>> > Verizon's residential serv
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 01:39:44PM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
>[...]
> to the cablemodem. I was told that having *any* ports "open facing the
> Internet" was a violation of Comcast's Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for
> residential accounts. [...]
This would be crippling if true - residential VOIP
On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 13:22 -0700, Martin Fick wrote:
> A right is something someone should not be able to
> prevent you from doing, not something that should be
> provided to you. I believe that "you have the right
> to be a space tourist if you want to be", but, of
> course, that does not imp
--- On Mon, 8/10/09, Martin Fick wrote:
> --- On Mon, 8/10/09, Scott Bennett wrote:
>
> > Next, the conversation took a turn
> > I was told that having *any* ports "open facing the
> > Internet" was a violation of Comcast's Acceptable Use
> > Policy (AUP) for residential accounts.
>
> Seem
On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 13:22 -0700, Martin Fick wrote:
> A right is something someone should not be able to
> prevent you from doing, not something that should be
> provided to you. I believe that "you have the right
> to be a space tourist if you want to be", but, of
> course, that does not imp
In the US, RoadRunner and WOW are <$50 for about 5+ megs down and
maybe half a meg up. Lots of people I know run all sorts of 'servers',
on their lines. Yes, these ISP's forbid 'servers' and 'proxies', etc
in their AUP's. Though no one I know has ever been hit with the stick.
They're all minimally
Ted Smith wrote:
On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 13:39 -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
Verizon residential service is only available at my location if I also
buy their telephone service, the combination of which would cost ~
$80/mo. and
also require a 12-month contract. I have yet to get the details on
Veriz
Praedor Atrebates(prae...@yahoo.com)@Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 03:09:23PM -0400:
> On Monday 10 August 2009 02:55:13 pm Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Scott Bennett wrote:
> > [snip]
> >
> > > business-class service, but it seems unlikely to be any cheaper.
> > > Verizon's
Ted Smith(ted...@gmail.com)@Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 02:52:26PM -0400:
> On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 13:39 -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
> > Verizon residential service is only available at my location if I also
> > buy their telephone service, the combination of which would cost ~
> > $80/mo. and
> > also req
--- On Mon, 8/10/09, Ted Smith wrote:
>
> Martin Fick wrote:
> > If they couldn't do this, to stay competitive, they
> > would charge more money for everyone and you would
> > suffer more. Cheap internet access and "serving" is
> > not some inherent human right, so let's not complain
> > about
On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 12:28 -0700, Martin Fick wrote:
> If they couldn't do this, to stay competitive, they
> would charge more money for everyone and you would
> suffer more. Cheap internet access and "serving" is
> not some inherent human right, so let's not complain
> about the price of gas
--- On Mon, 8/10/09, Scott Bennett wrote:
> Next, the conversation took a turn
> I was told that having *any* ports "open facing the
> Internet" was a violation of Comcast's Acceptable Use
> Policy (AUP) for residential accounts.
Seems like another good argument in favor of
implementing a
On Monday 10 August 2009 02:55:13 pm Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Scott Bennett wrote:
> [snip]
>
> > business-class service, but it seems unlikely to be any cheaper.
> > Verizon's residential service does not currently have a cap, but I don't
> > know whether they pro
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Scott Bennett wrote:
[snip]
> business-class service, but it seems unlikely to be any cheaper. Verizon's
> residential service does not currently have a cap, but I don't know whether
> they prohibit listening on ports accessable from the Internet.
VZN's residentia
On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 13:39 -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
> Verizon residential service is only available at my location if I also
> buy their telephone service, the combination of which would cost ~
> $80/mo. and
> also require a 12-month contract. I have yet to get the details on
> Verizon
> busin
I'm not spitting nails now, so I guess I've calmed down enough to post
this message. Friday, while waiting for Comcast to get its act together to
deal with registration problems involving the replacement cablemodem they
brought here (still not resolved), I received the monthly call from their
30 matches
Mail list logo
