The VoIP liability message is completely wrong Remember that the mere
appearance of a 9-1-1 call attempt is signal and that can get through an IP
network with redundant paths more reliable than over a system that requires
miles of copper pairs stay intact in an emergency. Of course IP over
If you read through this it seems strange. For example it says that the cost
of stringing an optical fiber to a home can be $1k or more.
$1K -- ATT spent $10K/customer to buy MediaOne's Coax plant. $1k for a fiber
is cheaper than sewers, sidewalks, or just about anything. You can pay that
off in
Well, responses continue to arrive from my query regarding DNS
redirection/diversion experiences. Frankly, I'm receiving enough
conflicting data at this point regarding non-standard DNS behavior
(for TW, Verizon, and now HughesNet) that really definitive
statements regarding any of these will
The mention of http: is very important since that's another
insidious form of denial of Internet. As Esme Vos pointed out you
can't use your Nintendo with Free Wi-Fi services because they
require a browser to simply setup a connection.
This is pervasive and far worse than blocking a few P2P
A quick additional note:
If you choose to try the DNS Diversion Test described in:
http://www.nnsquad.org/archives/nnsquad/msg00735.html
it would be best to do some ordinary (UDP) DNS lookups, e.g.:
dig @dns-test.nnsquad.org control.hq
as well as the zone lookup example that I showed
