will hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: (oh. what the hell. i'll bite.... ;) )
> You can get NAT done, but I'm not sure how long that will last. I > don't think the modem itself does NAT, though they require you to use > dhcp behind it to get an address. I run a 486, use IP chains with > static 192.168 address behind the modem. They allow you to purchase > your own modem, but it must be one they approve of. The future of NAT > and other services on Cox is not sure, but all indications are bad. That's one interpretation. Banning NAT is unlikely. It's too widespread. The ability to detect it's use is both theoretical and defeatable. (current versions of OpenBSD pf code include some nifty tricks for defeating NAT detection). I've never seen any indication from Cox -- public and otherwise -- that they care a wit about NAT. The modem must be at least DOCSIS 1.0 compliant. They provide a list of 3rd party purchasable modems that they provide _support_ for. This means that if you call their tech support and you have some other modem, they can't help you. However any DOCSIS modem will likely work unless it's got some broken implementation of the standard. I fail to understand why this is even an issue. > the cost of comptitive advantage before. Cox has so restricted their > service that it is impractical to offer anything through a Cox Modem, > regardless of how clever you are. I've never heard of anyone getting > a call from Cox for running anything, but other Cable companies have > called the FBI to raid homes of uncappers. This message delivered to you via an ssh session hosted on a Cox home account. Wanna see how my modem's doin? Try https://house.scottharney.com/stats/ or http://house.scottharney.com:81/stats/ Oh and I'm streaming music to myself at work (downsampled to just 56Kbps - suitable for crappy pc speakers) and doing other large downloands simultaneously. As far as I know Cox did not call the FBI, Buckeye Cable did in OH. Kind of a dead issue there as well but your opinion may vary ;) My public IP has changed exactly once in the past few years -- when Cox switched from @home to Cox HSI. > Do not count on files at your house being accesible. Upload speeds > are painfully slow due to capping at the modem. I've rented a server 256Kb is not too bad, actually. With any async connection, you're going to run into the TCP ACK issue. Whatever you use for a firewall can be setup to deal with this using traffic shapping technology. An explanation of how I am doing this with my openbsd 3.3 firewall may be found at: http://www.benzedrine.cx/ackpri.html This problem isn't due to the cap. It's due to the nature of async connections. It could be compounded by other localized problems. I'm not gonna go into troubleshooting RF networks here.... > Tech Support calls to Cox take a minimum of one hour. Calls to sales > are answered quickly, then routed to local service with prejudice. > The local service people are difficult to get in touch with and you Never used tech support in nearly 3 years so I can't speak to this. I do however follow www.broadbandreports.com and they provide solid support there. That's a VERY good site to explore broadband options and learn about these issues. Just presented as a contrast to will's PoV for the consideration of the original poster. -- Scott Harney<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "...and one script to rule them all." gpg key fingerprint=7125 0BD3 8EC4 08D7 321D CEE9 F024 7DA6 0BC7 94E5
