linux.gentoo.user

------=_Part_2232_12646867.1205253785706
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 10:30 AM, Mike Edenfield wrote:

> Mick wrote:
> > On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Dan Farrell wrote:
> >> On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:51:42 +0000
> >>
> >> Mick wrote:
> >>> On Monday 10 March 2008, Dan Farrell wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 15:43:55 -0400
> >>>>
> >>>> Mike Edenfield wrote:
> >>>>> Comcast?
> >>>> I was on comcast for a long time (2.5 yrs) and never had a problem
> >>>> like this. They might have blocked port 25 and squelched my
> >>>> bittorrenting at times, but never anything like this. Of course,
> >>>> ymmv.
> >>> IIRC they also block port 80 for sure on their retail accounts. They
> >>> don't want the average punter to run a webserver at home.
> >> Even when they blocked port 25 for me bidirectionally (evidently
> >> sending 6 gigs through that port made me look like a spammer, even if
> >> it was all to the same address ;) ), and I called security assurance
> >> and they listed that among all the open ports I wasn't allowed on a
> >> residential account, even then, they still didn't block port 80 (or 26,
> >> 22, 21, 110, 993, or any other port!).
> >
> > Hmm, I don't know . . . The particular address I was trying to connect
> was
> > definitely blocked. Other than not beeing able to connect with a
> browser,
> > nc, httping and tcptraceroute confirmed it). Could it be an
> area/account
> > specific block perhaps? When I questioned the owner he said that this
> was
> > common practice and that his ISP does not allow webservers to run.
>
> When I was on Comcast, the only ports they blocked outright,
> that I found, were mail related. Presumably this was a spam
> prevention measure more than anything else.
>
> However, they did *monitor* other common ports for traffic.
> Occasionally I'd put some local service or another on my
> firewall during development, or for testing, or whatnot. If
> it happened to be on port 80, 443, or 21, I'd usually get a
> nasty-gram from then within a day reminding me of their AUP.
>
> --Mike
>
> --
> gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
Who knows their Sandvine equipment is horrendous. But let's not get off
topic.

Collin: it may not be a "5-second rule". It may just be cutting it off
after a certain amount of traffic has passed based on the protocol/port
used. But I'm just speculating. Let's hear what fire-eyes has to say.

--
- Mark Shields

------=_Part_2232_12646867.1205253785706
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline