KE7JFF
SKU CHECK
join:2001-12-01
Hillsboro, OR | reply to vpnuser
Re: what about private servers?
I ran my own webserver for 3 years on my @Home/ATTBI/Comcast connection. Once I noticed traffic picked up by a lot, I moved my site to a dedicated webhost.
--
34 years of UNIX stability vs. 13 years of Windows stupidity |
|
fractalspher
join:2001-07-17
Chicago, IL
clubs:
| reply to vpnuser
Comcast knows there are enough technically savvy people out there that will run their own server equipment in their homes.
As long as you're not running your own business website that gets gigs of traffic a day I don't think they'll care. I know I've got 3 PC's here and I've had my own ftp, SSH, VPN and proxy server running for years and it's never been as issue. (I started this server back in 1998, before consumer broadband routers even existed!)
Mostly, they don't want you pulling more than one IP, either. If everything is hiding behind one connection point then you'll be fine. But don't advertise it to their help(less)desk if you call. You need to be responsible for troubleshooting your own stuff once it's past the broadband modem.
--
FractalSphere - "Maybe it's in the basement, I'll go upstairs and check" - M.C. Escher |
|
charter_eng
join:2004-01-18
Morristown, TN
| reply to ftzsee
I'm using Fedora right now-I know for a FACT that most servers are NOT enabled by default. You have to request that they be installed and enabled. Mandrake won't even install ssh by default on the desktop installation (which is the default on the download edition). |
|
ftzsee
Premium
join:2001-11-22
clubs:
|  reply to charter_eng
I beg to differ. Most Linux distros do come with those services enabled by default. Debian, Slackware, RedHat, Mandrake, Suse, Fedora Core, etc. come to mind. You don't need webmin for SSH, apache, finger, nor FTP.
said by charter_eng  :
Also, the web server in the WAP is for configuration only-doesn't have any purpose to anyone other than the person using the WAP.
The SSH server on my computer is for me only-doesn't have an purpose to anyone other than me. Same goes for FTP and web.
I'd contest that Linux is more widely used in server environments than Win2k server, but whatever. |
|
BrotherJPW
join:2003-11-27
Glen Ellyn, IL | reply to jansm38
I password protect my webserver and put front page extensions on it and only use it if I am saving a file from a remote computer. Its password protected and I made the realm: Linksys BEFW11S4 V2/V3. I hardly ever use it but its there. |
|
charter_eng
join:2004-01-18
Morristown, TN
| reply to ftzsee
By default, many operating systems have FTP, web, finger, ssh, etc. servers running. This must be "real mature" and grounds for disconnection.
The most popular server OS is Windows 2000 Server. FTP, SSH, finger, etc. are not enabled by default. Most Linux distros don't even have them enabled by default (unless they come with, and you select to install webmin). Also, the web server in the WAP is for configuration only-doesn't have any purpose to anyone other than the person using the WAP. |
|
jansm38
Vn800-B
Premium
join:2003-05-19
Blackwood, NJ
| reply to Epyon9283
said by Epyon9283 :
Im running a web server. It gets almost traffic though.
Maybe if you loosen the firewall a bit it will actually get traffic?
j/k - couldn't pass it up!   |
|
sortofageek
Premium,Mod
join:2001-08-19
Valhalla Dr
clubs:
 ·Comcast
Host:
Team Helix
Distributed Comput..
Linksys
Comcast HSI
Comcast Cable TV
| reply to vpnuser
Just a reminder to all of this forum rule:
No Personal Attacks (flames). Do not call other members names, even in jest. You may attack or dispute opinions and facts, but do so with facts and not by taking it to a personal level.
--
Team Helix Forum - Join Us? |
|
ftzsee
Premium
join:2001-11-22
clubs:
| reply to b1gdr3
said by b1gdr3 :
Real mature...hope you get busted and terminated
By default, many operating systems have FTP, web, finger, ssh, etc. servers running. This must be "real mature" and grounds for disconnection.
My wireless access point, which I have configured to have it's own IP address from comcast, has a webserver built into it. This also must be "real mature" huh? |
|
Epyon9283
Premium
join:2001-12-26
Dayton, NJ | reply to vpnuser
Im running a web server. It gets almost traffic though. |
|
SolarPup
IT Geek-Dawg
Premium
join:2002-03-07
The Pound
clubs:
·Comcast
 ·AT&T CallVantage
 ·Osiris Communicati..
| reply to vpnuser
I've got exchange 2000 and 2k server running right now... using nat entries, to different ports.. have port 80 turned off, and no ftp.. but 25 is open but secured against open relay.. and 3389's open but secured. Have been this way for 4 years.. no problems heard of yet. If I could only find a way to get the comcast noc guys to figure out they need to put an entry in the router (http-hack) to filter out the stupid code red and nimda crap, we'd all be doing ok...
--
"Gentlemen, I wouldn't trust this overgrown pile of microchips any further than I could throw it. And I don't know if you want to trust the safety of our country to some silicon diode." |
|
Mrhowes
join:2000-11-16
Saint Paul, MN
| reply to vpnuser
Bottom line...if you run a small server, and generate very little traffic, even though it is against the TOS, you likely will not be noticed.
It is those that draw a great deal of attention to themselves that are likely to get busted.
--
Listen....do you smell something? |
|
b1gdr3
I Blame Your Mother
join:2001-07-28
Pittsburgh, PA | reply to ftzsee
Real mature...hope you get busted and terminated
--
I wasn't born with enough middle fingers. |
|
plencnerb
Premium
join:2000-09-25
Franksville, WI
clubs:
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to vpnuser
I have to agree with everyone else who has posted.
I to run a small FTP/Web server out of my house (in fact, it actually runs on a server machine, Compaq Rackmount 4500). But, that machine, along with the other PC's on my network, are behind a netgear 4 port Web-safe router with NAT and a hardware firewall. On all my pc's (including the server), I run McAfee Enterprise 7.0.0 Virus Scanner. My FTP does not allow any anonymous connections, and the web sites I have are small and personal (not a lot of traffic).
If you do them for your friends/family, and keep things low on the bandwidth usage, then you should be ok. Also, keep an eye on your content. As others have stated, P0rn, cracks/warez,etc will get you shut down really quick.
--
============================
--Brian Plencner
E-Mail: saursesCancer@comcast.net
Note: Kill Cancer to Reply via e-mail |
|
CatScratch
Premium
join:2003-09-10
West Jordan, UT
·Vonage
| reply to djrobx
Like many threads before this one have stated, Comcast doesn't really care if you don't "abuse" the bandwidth. They do of course want to add the clause for the right to boot that one "abuser". Run your server apps responsibly and if you truly are a getting 'business' trafic, go with a different option. |
|
vang
Let's Get Ready To Get Ready
join:2002-01-02
Point Pleasant Beach, NJ
| reply to vpnuser
I've run my own web/mail/ftp/terminal services since the @Home days back in 98, with no problems. They're personal and low traffic. I asked a Comcast tech once if it would be a hassle, and was told that while against the AUP, unless you're serving up tons of data you likely won't get hassled.
I decided ro run my own mail server because @Home's was so horrible. I still run it, since I can now control spam reaching my mail using RBLs and other types of blacklists (entire country blocks work verrrry well). I'm down to roughly 1 spam message a week. I run antivirus software on the mail gateway, and strip all executable attachments so my wife can't accidentally infect my network. I smart host through Comcast's SMTP servers, and locked down the gateway to insure it's not an open relay. This is far better than the mail services Comcast could ever supply, and is worth the hassle of having to support.
My ftp server is for personal use to transfer files to and from work (and password protected). My web server is public, but is completely contentless, and is public only to show off technology I'm currently working with (resume fodder). I use Terminal Services to be able to access my home systems from work.
--
I love senselessly pushing things! |
|
wheelzoff
join:2001-02-14
Irving, TX
clubs:
1 edit | reply to vpnuser
I often run file-sharing progs all day and night, have since I had @Home, usually upload about 20 gigs a month, no word from anyone. So if you are not running a site selling stuff that is noticeable by a lot of people you shloud be fine.
--
"The Stars Win The Stanley Cup, The Stars Win The Stanley Cup", Ralph Strangis. |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
·PHONE POWER
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
1 edit | reply to vpnuser
quote:
Sending email, IMs, files to friends, uploading a webpage to a server or even posting on message boards
From a technical standpoint, one could define a server application as one which waits for and accepts a connection on a port. You can do all of the above things without a server connection. The only minor exception to that rule is standard mode FTP - it will open up a port and the remote service connects to it.
Servers are forbidden by the AUP, yet they don't block the majority of the ports used to run servers. If they really wanted to stop them altogether, they could pretty easily, but choose not to. As long as you don't create a problem, it's not likely that they're going to notice or take action.
Personally, however, I hate the "no-server" clauses in the AUPs. I shouldn't have to feel like an "abuser" because I want to log into my PC at home when I'm away, or because I want to log into my PVR's scheduler (all using piddly amounts of bandwidth, compared to p2p). Those sorts of things are part of the exciting world of always-on access. If Comcast doesn't want people running high traffic and/or business websites from their residential connections, why can't they just specify that and "legalize" servers that are used responsibly?
-- Rob
--
\\ROB - a part of the SCB local network |
|
hawk77777
join:2003-03-01
Royal Oak, MI
| reply to jansm38
If you think about it, any type of file uploading is being a server. Sending email, IMs, files to friends, uploading a webpage to a server or even posting on message boards. If they enforced it, we'd all be busted.
--
Win98 SE, 1.4 GHz Athlon, 256 MB SDRAM, 30 GB HD, Cable Internet |
|
jansm38
Vn800-B
Premium
join:2003-05-19
Blackwood, NJ
| reply to vpnuser
said by vpnuser:
I know the issue of web servers and comcast has come down to the fact that it's against the TOS, thus don't do it.
What about the realm of private servers, for only me to access? In my case it would be a VNC (search for tightvnc on google). Technically it is a server, but it is a consumer's use of internet - I've never heard of an account suspension because of PC anywhere use, and this is practically equivalent.
Any thoughts?
Servers of any type are "technically" not allowed but it's rarely enforced. Public facing servers that are open to anyone are what they look for, if they look at all. If they found out someone was serving kiddie p0rn or other illegal files they would take action.
The application you are talking about would not raise any eyebrows. It's the amount of upload traffic caused by "servers" that are the problem and it's what will catch the attention of Comcast. |
|
