Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
Re: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules
From: jseymour () linxnet com (Jim Seymour)
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:10:54 -0400 (EDT)
"Jeremiah Cornelius" <jeremiah () nur net> wrote:
[snip]
His "Terms of Service" are a minor contract,
IANAL. Please elucidate on this "minor contract" point. Again: IANAL, but I always understood that a contract is a contract is a contract.
and may well have been unilaterally ammended by the ISP after he became a customer.
[snip] That may well be. In which case one presumes his ISP wouldn't be taking measures such as blocking port 80 to him?
I don't think there is much of an ethical dilimma in helping this fellow out, as long as he is aware that he is risking his service.
Agreed: No ethical dilemma at all. It would clearly be wrong.
If, in his locale, he can't get an equivalent ISP without such an onerous restriction, then his ISP is likely an illegal monopoly.
We don't know that. I'm not sure it would matter even if we did. This is firewall-wizards, not alt.activism or whatever.
They block the ability to serve port 80? They are out of RFC compliance in providing Internet services.
Educate me: Which RFC would that be?
You probably can't get an uneducated court to agree - but I'd claim that what they are providing doesn't meet the definition of "Big-I" Internet, and are guilty of contratual bad-faith and misrepresentation.
Being in the high-tech industry for more years than I'd care to count, being specifically in systems & network administration for well over a decade, being somewhat conversant with how the law works, and even considering I'm a libertarian by nature (is that educated enough?): You'd not likely get even me to agree, if the TOS explicitly forbade servers/services. There is no God-given, natural law or Constitutional right to Internet access. What there is are for-profit companies (mostly) that provide various levels of Internet access, for a fee, under contractual agreement. If I sign a contract that says "No, I'll not run servers/services," then that's the contract. Btw: *Most* DSL and cable broadband providers do have SOHO/business packages that allow the running of services and give one static IP addresses. Many areas of the country have alternate (usually DSL) broadband providers that can supply business-class connectivity. Of course: These options all come at a price. Jim _______________________________________________ firewall-wizards mailing list firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
Current thread:
- About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Servie Platon (Aug 28)
- Re: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Jim Seymour (Aug 29)
- Re: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Mark (Aug 30)
- Re: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Jim Seymour (Aug 30)
- Re: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Barney Wolff (Aug 30)
- Re: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Jim Seymour (Aug 30)
- Re: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Mark (Aug 30)
- Re: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Paul D. Robertson (Aug 30)
- Re: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Jim Seymour (Aug 29)
- Re: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Jeremiah Cornelius (Aug 30)
- Re: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Paul D. Robertson (Aug 30)
- Re: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Servie Platon (Aug 30)
- Re: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Jim Seymour (Aug 30)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules Fetch, Brandon (Aug 30)
- About Port Forwarding, Apache and Firewall Rules - conclusion Servie Platon (Aug 30)