[e2e] Re: crippled Internet

Andrew Smith ah_smith at pacbell.net
Wed Apr 18 09:48:36 PDT 2001

Of course there are other practical issues, involving private and/or dynamic
IP addresses and PPP-over-Ethernet tunnels (yuck!) that are typically forced
on you as a residential DSL consumer these days, which make it hard to enjoy
jon's Real IP (tm). It could be a long wait for those TCP connections to
arrive if nobody knows today's IP address. Some simple web page
"indirector", updated every time the server IP address changes, could
provide the DNS function I suppose. Methinks we need better FOGLAMPS.


-----Original Message-----
From: end2end-interest-admin at postel.org
[mailto:end2end-interest-admin at postel.org]On Behalf Of RJ Atkinson
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 6:55 AM
To: Vernon Schryver
Cc: end2end-interest at postel.org
Subject: Re: [e2e] Re: crippled Internet

At 00:25 18/04/01, Vernon Schryver wrote:

>What about the following words from
>http://www.home.com/support/aup/ ?
>    You may not run a server in connection with the @Home
>    residential service, nor may you provide network services to
>    others via the @Home residential service. The @Home
>    residential service includes personal Webspace accounts for
>    publishing personal Web pages. Examples of prohibited uses
>    include, but are not limited to, running servers for mail, http,
>    ftp, irc, and dhcp, and multi-user interactive forums.
>I've seen reports that say that @Home employees interpret those words as
prohibiting any program that does a passive TCP open,
>but that they also say that the AUP is not heavily enforced.

        The AUP gives them legal aircover to shut down bandwidth
hogs that are bandwidth hogs due to improper servers.  The most
common case I know of was folks with GNUtella or illegal (due
to copyright law) ftp/http servers with MP3s.  @Home only checks
for bandwidth hogs when there are performance complaints about
a specific residential subnet.  When there is a bandwidth hog
identified due to that circumstance, there is nearly always
(in my experience, it was ALWAYS an MP3 server) an inappropriate
server.  For folks like most of us, @Home doesn't check or care
about a small ftp or http server, provided it doesn't cause
other customers to have visible performance degradation.

        I might wish the US legal system were other than it is,
but it is what it is.  The legal system drives the AUP text,
not the actual practices of the operator.

rja at inet.org

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list