[NTLUG:Discuss] dsl or cable modem w/ static IP in Richardson?

[Daniel Hauck]

I'm an @home user and I love it also.  It's effective and clean.  DSL is a
close second but you can take it for granted that running servers is in
violation of any agreements unless you are buying commercial grade service.

I would love to know the IPs they run these port scanners from.  I'd block
them in a heartbeat to be sure I don't get caught.  I like to run personal
web pages and stuff like that on my linux router box because it's
entertaining.  So if anyone knows a handy way to log port-scan activities so
I can isolate where these are coming from, I'll simply block them out.

Later, ambitious projects include setting up my own domain services complete
with email. :)  I think I will be able to pull that off nicely.  I've done
that already with a SWBell DSL connection and it's working very very well
though it took DNS about 48 hours to fully propogate.  I'll know what to
expect the next time.

I suspect no one cares unofficially unless I start using loads of bandwidth,
which I currently do not.


----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Cox <cjcox at acm.org>
To: <discuss at ntlug.org>
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: [NTLUG:Discuss] dsl or cable modem w/ static IP in Richardson?


> @home claims that the IP won't change unless they're forced to
> to some new network segregation based on utilization.  I've only
> had @home since October.  BLAZING downloads at about 2.5mbps and
> getting over 1mbps on upload.
>
> BUT...(there's always a BUT)... they HAVE NO CLUE how to handle
> capacity on their mail servers.  They know this and are supposedly
> in a VERY long process of upgrading things to support the demand.
> When their mail server is up (it's been up consistently over the
> past few weeks..), it's DOG slow! (a 14.4K modem to an analog ISP
> will beat it).
>
> Also, @home does periodically run port scanners looking for
> things like nntp and http servers.  You will be in breach of contract
> if you run high load servers on their net... it's not designed
> to handle it and will just make all of you neigbors really mad
> at you.  @home does provide free web pages as part of the deal...
> however, I hear it's about as slow as their email servers.
>
> My guess is that even with your existing DSL ISP, you might be
> violating your agreement by running servers through them...
> maybe not.
>
> There a few posted horror stories from people trying to run
> high load servers on @home, but I don't know of anyone
> personally that has been reprimanded for running a server
> on their net (probably the key is when you get /.'d or
> something that generates high load).
>
> Regards,
> Chris
>