Comcast blocks port 25 incoming, yet again

[Coleman Kane]

On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 18:01 -0400, Ben Scott wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Coleman Kane <cokane at cokane.org> wrote:
> >  As far as I can tell, I need to get in touch with their business reps in
> >  order to figure out a business package that works for me.
> 
>   Yah, their residential division cannot sell the business packages,
> and indeed, are often not even aware of then.  If you seriously want
> to go that route, I suggest identifying yourself to Comcast as a
> business.  If you say you're calling from a residence you'll just
> confuse them.  Say you have a small business office and want service.
> This isn't even necessarily being misleaning; an individual can run a
> sole proprietorship pretty much just by saying they are.
> 
> > I did find their "teleworker" package that must
> >  be purchased in lots of ten by an employer and are a whopping $99 each.
> 
>   Yah, in addition to lousy customer service and draconian AUP,
> Comcast's rates are also quite high.  Good, fast, cheap: Pick none.
> 
> >  When in Cincinnati, I had good service relations with Cincinnati Bell
> >  out there. That may be due in part to them being the only remaining
> >  local telco that wasn't a former vital organ of AT&T...
> 
>   That -- not being a Baby/Big Bell -- actually makes a really big
> difference most of the time.  NH used to have a number of small local
> telcos, who -- from what I've been told -- generally had good service.
>  But anything that used to be Ma Bell -- forget it.  They practically
> invented bad customer service[1].  "We don't care.  We don't have to.
> We're the phone company."
> 
> [1] Well, actually, banks invented bad customer service, but the
> telcos automated it.
> 
> >  Of course, your best bet with their DSL is if you live within the
> >  inner-city limits.
> 
>   Yah, and even that can be really iffy in New England.  Some of the
> outside plant (lines on the poles, junction boxes, etc.) is incredibly
> old and outdated.  It's not at all uncommon to find stuff over 50
> years old, and which hasn't been properly maintained, either.  You're
> lucky to be able to run 28 Kbit/sec modem over it, let alone DSL.  In
> my old hometown of Newton, I remember when they had to replace a large
> junction box because the tree it was nailed to grew far enough to
> start pulling the wires off the termination blocks.
> 
> -- Ben

So... an update to all of this...

I got Verizon DSL this week, and it turns out that they do block some
traffic. They specifically block incoming port 80 traffic and nothing
else, with the explicit reason that they want to block people from
running webservers. I learned this, after the sales person assured me
that they don't block inbound traffic. I also was occupied for two hours
arguing with multiple first-tier technicians who told me (in broken
English) that it had to be my problem and that Verizon/FairPoint doesn't
block *any* inbound traffic. Additionally, their usage policy doesn't
state anything about blocking incoming traffic. It turns out that there
is a paragraph that states that they don't want you to run a server, but
it says that I agree to Verizon reducing my bandwidth or disconnecting
my service if I exceed their (unspecified) bandwidth limits.

Additionally they don't block any other inbound traffic. So (if I were a
luser), my inbound port 137-139 are open, as well as port 449 and port
25. So, is it just me, or are they specifically picking on web-servers
here? The policy is quite absurd, in my mind. It is almost like they are
choosing to pick on home-web-servers because of some inbred prejudice.

The only upside is that Verizon gave me a 30 free-trial deal that I can
run out, and I don't have to pay anything before I switch to another
provider. I am looking into mv.com right now, as my best option.
Speakeasy is nice, but they are expensive, and provide more that I need.
MV sounds great, but the activation fee is high (especially since I am
pretty certain I'll be moving again in August).

I did find another company named DSLExtreme (http://www.dslextreme.com/)
that apparently allows servers and even provides a web-interface for
blocking/unblocking port 25. Additionally, they endorse the use of their
connection for home-serving. There's a helpful FAQ here:
http://www2.dslextreme.com/Support/KB/Details.aspx?questionid=11128

Right now I am looking into them as my best bet. The agent on the phone
has told me that they don't charge activation right now... and the
prices are less expensive than any of my other options. So they are
worth looking into as an option. The downside is that they're located in
Salt Lake City, UT... so no local office.

-- 
Coleman Kane