On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 08:05:37PM -0600, Dave Ihnat wrote: > > YMMV. Essentially, look for a Linux/Unix-friendly provider if you > can. Otherwise, be religious about honoring the intended spirit of > the agreement, if not the letter, and tell them politely how silly > they're being if called on it; but be ready to move.
I'll give another take on this, with a very large ISP that uses very vague legalese....something like "servers with public content". So I ask them WTF does that mean? Does a mail server for just my LAN have "public content"? Ssh? They will tell you, 'it really means all servers of any kind'. Yea? Identd? "What's that?". It is CYA stuff so they have a hammer to get rid of problem customers. If they didn't want web servers, it would be trivial to block port 80 traffic. But they don't. And then they word things vaguely so they can _interpret_ it as they need to. As further evidence, I know of exactly one customer that got his account yanked in over 2 years, and that was for being a spammer (he denies it vehemently, and it was windows, not nix). And there are many, many running personal web and mail. So a) they don't enforce it b) they word it vaguely and c) they implicitly allow traffic that is supposedly prohibited. This might not apply to all ISPs, but I'd say if port 80 is open, it's open for a reason. :) -- Hal Burgiss _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
