Stupid server semantic argument (was: Non Linux but network tech question)

[Dan Jenkins]

Travis Roy wrote:
> The original post was about a local library. I know when I was  
> working at the local public access channel in Goffstown the cable  
> committee for the town had an agreement with (then) MediaOne to offer  
> higher speed access (than a normal customer) to the schools, the town  
> hall, and the library. There was also other provisions with regard to  
> access and feeds back to the TV Station for live broadcast. That may  
> be something the original poster might want to check into. Even if  
> they do give it the okay as an exception it may be easier for the  
> original poster to do some kind of port work around so that Comcast  
> doesn't have to make some weird exception for one modem on the node.
>   
I recommend the port workaround. It is more durable.

An elementary school we serve had a written contract with the local 
cable company to provide them a static IP and to allow them to run their 
own mail and web server. This worked well for about a year. Then the 
school was disconnected for violating the terms of service against 
servers. When shown the contract, the cable company informed them that 
their terms of service, which they could change at will, overrode any 
other arrangements. The attorney for the town thought that a novel 
interpretation of contract law, but the school felt it wasn't worth 
pursuing through legal channels. We provided them a workaround, which 
has survived three changes of ownership of the cable company.

--
Dan Jenkins (dan at rastech.com), Rastech Inc., Bedford, NH, USA - 
1-603-206-9951