On Fri, 17 May 2002, Jonathan M. Slivko wrote: > > I disagree. I signed up for a connection to the Internet and > > bandwidth--period--when I contracted with my isp. This recent nonsense of > > blocking ports is just plain insulting. > > > > Assuming that I am a responsible citizen (which any administrator needs to > > be on ANY network) on the Internet, what I do with my bandwidth is my > > business. > > > > I did NOT sign up for X hours or for Y Gb of traffic. If I choose to run a > > server at my site, I'm ***saving my isp money*** and resources since they > > do not have to run that service for me or allocate the disk space to me. > > Mark is absolutely right in this case, all we are really paying for is the > connection and the bandwidth and that's the end of it, whatever the > customer does with it is protected under the first ammendment, barring > anything illegal that may be done or anything that is done to harm, > frighten, etc.
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree, here. Mark is only allowed to do, with his bandwidth, what his contract/agreement with the ISP says he is allowed to do, and he is only allocated what his contract/agreement says he is allocated. If it does not say he's allocated static IP, or that he's allowed to run server type services, or that it is a home DSL or Cable connection, then it's reasonable for the ISP to assume that he's only going to do home type internet use (browsing, email, chatting, etc). Again, it all comes down to terms of service. _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
