web mail

[Derek Martin]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 04:33:08PM -0400, bscott at ntisys.com wrote:
> > Though apparently *@#$&*&D#!!! Adelphia's blocked my port 80 ...
> 
>   Just in case you're not aware: Adelphia's TOS prohibit running servers of
> any kind.

Just because they told you that they won't let you doesn't make it
suck any less that you can't...

<sarcasm mode=heavy>
...and of course /no one/ ever intentionally does anything their TOS
says they can't.
</sarcasm>

<rant>
Besides which, this restriction in providers' TOS agreements is an
arbitrary limitation which we, as consumers, should not stand for.
FWIW, I am /not/ currently a Comcast customer, and likely won't be
ever, unless their TOS agreement changes.  And the same goes for any
high-speed provider with similar restrictions.  [I'll apparently need
to make sure I live near somewhere that Speakeasy services, and ensure
they don't go out of business... ;-)]

The following is quoted directly from Comcast's "Pro" TOS addendum
dated 3/13/2003, and can be viewed on-line here:

  http://www.comcast.net/terms/2003-03-13-proaddendum.jsp

  2. Use of Service. The Subscriber Agreement is hereby modified to
  permit You to use the Service for small business commercial purposes
  in accordance with Comcast's then current published Comcast
  High-Speed Internet Pro product description (which may be changed
  from time to time in Comcast's sole discretion); provided that no
  servers will be placed behind your connection (i.e., HTTP, SMTP,
  NNTP, FTP, DNS, DHCP, etc.). Comcast does not represent or warrant
  that the Service is appropriate for business or commercial use or
  will work as desired. [other irrelevant material omitted]

Nothing further is said about what constitutes a server.  So, then,
what IS a server?

The Internet is, by its very nature, a 2-way communication medium.
The client-server model is just that: a model, by which two hosts
communicate with eachother.  In that model, one host initiates a
connection to another host.  The former is said to be the client, and
the latter is said to be the server.  But this is just an arbitrary
designation; the communication which goes on between the two once the
connection is established goes in both directions.  In many cases, the
traffic most commonly goes predominantly in one direction, with the
receiving host mostly sending acknowledgements of its receipt of the
data.  The sender is usually the server, and the receiver is usually
the client.

However, this is also often not the case.

Let's take the example of an FTP server.  Let's also say, purely
hypothetically,  I have a dozen friends, with whom I want to share a
bunch of files.  They all have control over an FTP server, which they
are allowed to use however they see fit, by whomever is responsible
for making that decision.  I, OTOH, am a Comcast customer, and am
subject to thier TOS, which I do not want to violate.

Because of my job, I have access to a variety of software products,
each of which ordinarily takes up multiple CDs, which is in the
process of being beta tested.  I want to provide each of my friends
with a copy of each of these software products, because they're bored
and feel like helping with the beta test.  So, I open a connection to
each of their FTP servers, and do an FTP put of each of the files,
saturating my upstream bandwidth for days on end, transfering all of
these files to each of their servers.

I have initiated the connection, and I am running only clients, not
running a server.  I have not violated the terms of my service
agreement (at least, not this clause).

Now, a new beta is released.  I decide that all this is rather
tedious, and as it turns out my friends don't want every file; each
only wants certain particular ones.  But, I still don't want to run a
server, so that I won't violate my TOS agreement.  Instead, I have my
friends e-mail me with a particular subject, with the files they want
to download listed in the body of the message.  I hack up some VB
script to automate opening a connection to their individual FTP
servers and put the requested files to the server.  Then I configure
my Outlook client to check my mail every 10 seconds, and kick off my
VB script when those certain messages come in.

I have still initiated all of the connections, and am still not
running a server.  I have still not violated the terms of my service
agreement.

Alas, Microsoft software being what it is, all this makes my system
unstable, and requires me to attend to it often to restart my mail
client after it blue-screens, or reboot my computer when it locks up
hard.  So I give in, and I install an FTP server, and let my friends
just download whatever files they want, whenever they want.

Now, I have violated my TOS.  But I ask you, what is the PRACTICAL
difference between each of the three cases?  Absofrickenlutely
nothing.  The same bits get sent in the same direction the same number
of times, using up the same amount of bandwidth (or, actually, less in
the last two cases than in the first).  As far as I'm concerned, what
software I ran on MY system to send that traffic is none of my
provider's @#$%! business, until and unless I do something illegal, or
cause them a quantifiable problem.

Now, instead of an FTP server, we could use e-mail.  I have a
handy-dandy e-mail program (probably a news reader) which will break
large files down into small enough chunks that mail servers will
accept them, and my friends have the same program, which will
re-assemble the files for them.  I'm not running a server.  What's the
difference?

Now, how many people run NNTP to keep their system clocks synced to
standard time?  Even if you tell it not to listen to incoming
connections, (x)ntpd /is/ a server, technically, and makes connections
(to sync the time, as a client) over your Comcast connection, so
you're technically violating your TOS, even though the circumstances
are absurd (and unlikely to be noticed by Comcast, but that's beside
the point).

The no-servers restriction is arbitrary and asinine, and we are not
being responsible consumers by accepting it.
</rant>

- -- 
Derek D. Martin
http://www.pizzashack.org/
GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+75kbHEnASN++rQIRAp1WAJ9sPc+ExaZuy1W/+D2UXJumYBLv/QCaA8Tk
DZgQnSic96RIjSc6lzkirCI=
=N34f
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----