Re: Comcast throws down gauntlet to residential accounts

[Bill Weiss <houdini+tor@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ted Smith(teddks@xxxxxxxxx)@Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 02:52:26PM -0400:
> On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 13:39 -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
> > Verizon residential service is only available at my location if I also
> > buy their telephone service, the combination of which would cost ~
> > $80/mo. and
> > also require a 12-month contract.  I have yet to get the details on
> > Verizon
> > business-class service, but it seems unlikely to be any cheaper.
> > Verizon's
> > residential service does not currently have a cap, but I don't know
> > whether
> > they prohibit listening on ports accessable from the Internet.
> 
> I believe they do, under the same guise of prohibiting "servers" on
> consumer-level accounts. I haven't read the AUP, just something I've
> heard. That being said, I've been running sshd+vpnd+other assorted gunk
> on my "FIOS" connection for a while, so I would presume that they don't
> actively enforce that policy.
> 
> Are there any non-business ISP's in the US that are positive towards
> using your connection at all? It seems like everything is capped or
> AUP'd up the wazoo, to the point where you will *not* get what you paid
> for.

Speakeasy.net is happy to let you use your connection.  They're also
significantly more expensive than your normal home-use DSL or cable.
Worth it?  Your call.

-- 
Bill Weiss
 
No tool is inherently good or evil. Okay, except maybe for Frontpage.
    -- Mike Sphar