Comcast permanent block on port 25

Bruno Wolff III bruno at wolff.to
Fri Dec 19 20:51:05 UTC 2008


On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 13:37:23 -0700,
  Craig White <craigwhite at azapple.com> wrote:
> ----
> the cable companies in the US typically sell a residential Internet
> package which requires that you not run a mail or web server as part of
> their terms of service and typically block inbound access to ports 25 &
> 80 to those customers. Many also block port 25 outbound access to all
> but their own SMTP servers. In exchange for this 'crippled' Internet
> service, they charge roughly 1/3 the cost of a 'business' based Internet
> service which doesn't block anything at all. It seems reasonably fair to
> me.

How is it fair? Business accounts cost more because you get uptime guaranties
and real support and depending on the type of connection you may be allowed
to use your maximum bandwidth all of the time. (Though the latter service
typically is going to cost more than 3x the residential rate.)

While blocking these ports may actually be helpful for some people (to limit
damage when they aren't capable of securing their systems), there really
isn't a good reason for this for people that don't need that protection.
There isn't any basis there to charge people several times extra in order
to not have to check things in their routers. If anything the people that
need those blocks are the ones that should be getting charged more.




More information about the users mailing list