Re: home web server in W.O.W. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20629732 en Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:09:15 EDT Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:09:15 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20683092 jdong :
said by NormanS See Profile :

Even HTTP can defeat NAT, in that respect. But you first have to initiate an outbound connection to accomplish that.
No, it's not the same thing. In HTTP, the remote host is NOT behind a NAT. In Skype, the remote host IS under a NAT. By sending probe packets with mirrored src/dst ports, NAT can be fooled to allow a connection through.
--
Ubuntu MOTU Developer and Forums Council]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20683092 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:06:21 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20681373 NormanS : Even HTTP can defeat NAT, in that respect. But you first have to initiate an outbound connection to accomplish that.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20681373 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 14:35:50 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680523 jdong :
said by NormanS See Profile :

You posted it, you prove it.
Do you use Skype? Ever wondered why it can do direct peer-to-peer TCP connections without port forwarding? Skype uses many forms of NAT port-punching to fool NAT routers into forwarding ports. This usually requires some level of knowledge about the host computers (i.e. the two copies of Skype communicate first via a 3rd party Skype server to coordinate which source and destination ports to hammer)

But yes, NAT can be defeated from the perspective as a firewall and it typically only requires luring the remote party to establish one connection to you to figure out their TCP stack characteristics.
--
Ubuntu MOTU Developer and Forums Council]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20680523 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 10:56:21 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20675018 Inflex : "Prove it" is much different from "That's interesting, could you point me somewhere that I can learn more?".]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20675018 Fri, 20 Jun 2008 20:58:01 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20667706 NormanS : The burden of proof of an assertion is on the one making the assertion. Nothing wrong with that attitude.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20667706 Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:06:02 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20664071 Inflex :
said by NormanS See Profile :

You posted it, you prove it.
With an attitude like that?

Nah...I don't have the time.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20664071 Wed, 18 Jun 2008 19:52:26 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20660022 NormanS : You posted it, you prove it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20660022 Wed, 18 Jun 2008 01:18:07 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20651582 The Joker : it's way better then comcast that's for sure.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20651582 Mon, 16 Jun 2008 15:06:05 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20650668 Inflex : Google is your friend.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20650668 Mon, 16 Jun 2008 12:20:53 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20644218 NormanS : Show me.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20644218 Sat, 14 Jun 2008 20:27:51 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20640905 Inflex : Just plain old software.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20640905 Fri, 13 Jun 2008 23:22:30 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20635979 NormanS : What tools would one need? $50 off-the-shelf stuff from your local Fry's Electronics, or $50,000 stuff only the NSA can afford?
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20635979 Fri, 13 Jun 2008 00:48:56 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20629732 Inflex :
said by NormanS See Profile :

I set up a cousin behind NAT. Kind of hard to reach his computer from the Internet.
Not with the right tools. AT&T researchers cracked NAT about a decade ago.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20629732 Wed, 11 Jun 2008 22:17:42 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20613386 NormanS : I set up a cousin behind NAT. Kind of hard to reach his computer from the Internet.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20613386 Mon, 09 Jun 2008 01:55:04 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20613203 anon :
said by Inflex See Profile :

Use NAT for security?

How quaint.
NAT is an excellent first-line defense. Obviously in this context it's worthless, but to completely discount the security it provides is disingenuous.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20613203 Mon, 09 Jun 2008 00:25:12 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20548382 Inflex : Use NAT for security?

How quaint.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20548382 Tue, 27 May 2008 20:10:14 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20547532 bewale :
said by Pv8man999 :

You could also keep yours behind NAT so WOW can't see it.

Well, if he needs it to be a public webserver, yes, WOW will be able to see it even if it's behind a NAT... otherwise it wouldn't be a very useful webserver. Sure, you could write fancy firewall rules that attempt to block all access from source of WOW's network, but that also assumes you don't need anyone with WOW as an ISP to access it.

Bottom line - as long as you're managing the site appropriately (patches, etc.) and it's low volume, you won't hear a peep from WOW.

--
"In a world of compromise, some don't."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20547532 Tue, 27 May 2008 17:51:25 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20546686 anon : I have WOW and have been running my 2 servers for about 4 years now.

They wont say anything unless it starts to pull like 500GB of bandwidth a month.

You could also keep yours behind NAT so WOW can't see it.
Just use port forwarding like me.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20546686 Tue, 27 May 2008 15:33:56 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20544144 anon : I've been hosting a low-volume web server since day one with WOW (6 or 7 years) and I've never heard a peep from them. If you're not hurting their network, they're not going to bother you.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20544144 Tue, 27 May 2008 01:00:57 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20542140 anon : yeah its not that i want the performance to be spectacular it is only to show off work for clients so they can view easily or like bewale said post images into forums. I am using a wamp apache server also. Its good to hear that if i keep it low volume i shouldnt have an issue]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20542140 Mon, 26 May 2008 16:33:29 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20541350 bewale : I run an Apache web server on my static-IP'd WOW account, but it's extremely low volume. Only hosts small images that I insert into forum posts, etc. My advice would be to see if the 10MB hosted webpage that WOW provides covers your needs - it's faster than you hosting, more dependable and avoids the whole ToS issue. If you're looking to host hundreds of MBs off your cable modem. that probably isn't the best idea anyway from a speed/performance perspective.

Can you do it, most likely w/o issue? Yes, there's many people here who are running BitTorrent 24x7 at much higher sustained volumes I'm sure.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20541350 Mon, 26 May 2008 13:07:30 EDT Re: home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20540725 burgermeister : I don't think I'd even go down that road. I don't know what they block or look for, but in my experience, I've found it much better to get a cheap Go Daddy account (or some other web hosting) to do that. I think the Go Daddy economy plan is like $4.00 a month.

What's nice is back when I was using Covad, I could run a server but found it cheaper to use Go Daddy as leaving your computer on all the time uses at least 4.00 worth electricity a month!

Just a thought, but it is an easy fix to your problem.
--
"I've learned that depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20540725 Mon, 26 May 2008 10:56:59 EDT home web server http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20538183 anon : just wondering what your experiences with getting blocked for excessive bandwidth use with WOW is, I wanted to run my home server to host my images for random forums posts but i dont want to lose my service. Anyone have experience with what kind of bandwidth wow will allow?

thanks]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20538183 Sun, 25 May 2008 17:36:40 EDT