SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users"
Scott A Crosby
crosby at qwes.math.cmu.edu
Thu Jan 31 21:57:02 UTC 2002
On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Borchers, Mark wrote:
> > If the ISP sells "unlimited" access, then customers have
> > every right to use it without limit.
> Indubitably. But customers are not free to pick and choose
> among which provisions of the service agreement they want to
> abide by. If the ISP provides unlimited access but limits
> the account to a single host, then that is the terms of service.
> The problem, as has been noted, is enforcement.
It is a single computer. If I have a dialup, as I have now, it is one
computer. If it NAT's other computers through it, I'm still using exactl
one connection. One IP.
Now, if I were to get two computers, and have both of them dialup, then
they'd have reason to complain and kick me off.
By the same token, a NAT box is one computer, uses the resources of one
computer. Only one computer is plugged into the cable-modem. Its a router,
but its still only one computer.
Also, 'terms and services' can be interesting.. Pulling out the nearest
``Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of
this publication may be reproduced, stored in, or introduced into a
retrieval system, or transmitted in any form, or by any means ...
without the prior written permission ....''
-- Publication page of Simon Green's 'Deathstalker War'
Which claims, among other things that I cannot send this email, and I
cannot quote any extract, no matter how small, from that paperback. Both
of which are nonsense.
More information about the NANOG