Re: [fw-wiz] About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules

From: Jim Seymour (jseymour_at_linxnet.com)
Date: 08/30/04

  • Next message: Jim Seymour: "Re: [fw-wiz] About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules"
    To: firewall-wizards@honor.icsalabs.com
    Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:10:54 -0400 (EDT)
    
    

    "Jeremiah Cornelius" <jeremiah@nur.net> wrote:
    >
    [snip]
    >
    > His "Terms of Service" are a minor contract,

    IANAL. Please elucidate on this "minor contract" point. Again: IANAL,
    but I always understood that a contract is a contract is a contract.

    > and may well have been
    > unilaterally ammended by the ISP after he became a customer.
    [snip]

    That may well be. In which case one presumes his ISP wouldn't be
    taking measures such as blocking port 80 to him?

    >
    > I don't think there is much of an ethical dilimma in helping this fellow
    > out, as long as he is aware that he is risking his service.

    Agreed: No ethical dilemma at all. It would clearly be wrong.

    >
    > If, in his locale, he can't get an equivalent ISP without such an onerous
    > restriction, then his ISP is likely an illegal monopoly.

    We don't know that. I'm not sure it would matter even if we did. This
    is firewall-wizards, not alt.activism or whatever.

    > They block the
    > ability to serve port 80? They are out of RFC compliance in providing
    > Internet services.

    Educate me: Which RFC would that be?

    > You probably can't get an uneducated court to agree -
    > but I'd claim that what they are providing doesn't meet the definition of
    > "Big-I" Internet, and are guilty of contratual bad-faith and
    > misrepresentation.

    Being in the high-tech industry for more years than I'd care to count,
    being specifically in systems & network administration for well over a
    decade, being somewhat conversant with how the law works, and even
    considering I'm a libertarian by nature (is that educated enough?):
    You'd not likely get even me to agree, if the TOS explicitly forbade
    servers/services.

    There is no God-given, natural law or Constitutional right to Internet
    access. What there is are for-profit companies (mostly) that provide
    various levels of Internet access, for a fee, under contractual
    agreement. If I sign a contract that says "No, I'll not run
    servers/services," then that's the contract.

    Btw: *Most* DSL and cable broadband providers do have SOHO/business
    packages that allow the running of services and give one static IP
    addresses. Many areas of the country have alternate (usually DSL)
    broadband providers that can supply business-class connectivity. Of
    course: These options all come at a price.

    Jim
    _______________________________________________
    firewall-wizards mailing list
    firewall-wizards@honor.icsalabs.com
    http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards


  • Next message: Jim Seymour: "Re: [fw-wiz] About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: increase in spam and what to do about it
      ... The agreements are executed by tou asking me to exchange email ... just like any other contract. ... How is USENET News done today? ... from people like UPenn and an ISP in Belgium. ...
      (comp.os.vms)
    • Re: increase in spam and what to do about it
      ... were me and you I would likely opt for a gentlemans agreement. ... just like any other contract. ... from people like UPenn and an ISP in Belgium. ... Try setting up a news server on your own. ...
      (comp.os.vms)
    • Re: BT Total Broadband
      ... an explicit or implicit personal contract. ... the taxi driver says he doesn't like the cut of your jib and he ... They are no more unrelated than customer, ISP, and copyright holder. ... If you breach your contract with your ISP by illicitly downloading copyright ...
      (uk.legal)
    • Re: AOL any good?
      ... activation fee, if they've no guarantee you'll stick around for a year? ... 1 month contract, and new customers pay in full. ... ISP they shouldn't need to offer a 1-month contract, ... Virgin.net was doing monthly contract and no activation fee, ...
      (uk.telecom.broadband)
    • Re: Virgin Media throttling Usenet
      ... contractual right to apply 'throttling' or 'traffic shaping' when ... mentioned in the contract which they signed. ... When you joined Blue Yonder (as a new subscriber) did they have a set ... these conditions will give the ISP a 'free ...
      (uk.telecom.broadband)