Dyndns

[Technomage-hawke]

On Wednesday 13 June 2007 14:05, Stephen wrote:
> Later COX will start blocking that port as well. I was running a ssh server
> (to tunnel vnc) on port 23022. It worked great for weeks, then they started
> blocking the port. I switched to another port, they appeared to be blocking
> the 23xxx port range. After I tried a 24000 port, the ssh server worked
> again. Well a few weeks later, it stopped working too. Just to see, I had
> my friend (on the same street, so the same cable sub-net) to try
> connecting. He was able to connect just fine. So I could rule out problems
> on my firewall or internal network. When cox finds out you're running a
> server, they just block your port. As it's my own personal ssh server, not
> a public server, I don't believe it falls under their rules against running
> a server. But I guess they just like to block whatever they can.
>
> Stephen

well,
actually what they are doing is packet analysis and shaping.
they detect traffic on a port inbound to your machine, and nothing that 
originated from your machine to cause it, the border routers red flag that 
for human review. after a specified time, it gets blocked.

I am having serious thought to setting up a forwarding vpn through a shell 
provider so that I may get my ssh traffic 9and mail (smtp) and other services 
forwarded via that tunnel. 

since it will be encrypted, etc, they would have to cut me off rom outbound 
access to prevent it (and even though their TOS says "no vpn", they can't 
really enforce it, especially if it leads to denial of service they have 
previously advertised <unlimited downloads, etc>).

a big part f this is the scare they have in them from the "content industry" 
wishing to control what we see/hear, etc (for a price of course).

it really is time to consider net neutrality.