Access to firewalled ports
Access to firewalled ports
Posted Dec 14, 2014 17:02 UTC (Sun) by nix (subscriber, #2304)In reply to: Access to firewalled ports by mathstuf
Parent article: Foo over UDP
They actually work quite well as a service, speed-of-light-induced latency being what it is: the only real problem with them is that ToS and filtering, blocking virtually everything and thus making me feel like I'm breaking some rule whenever I dare log in to work from my parents' house, let alone set up a tunnel so I can do a git pull or some other dark and dire activity like that.
As for where this is called out in their terms of service... well, I can't even *find* the terms of service any more, they're so well hidden: when last I found them several years ago they marked almost everything as FORBIDDEN including things like 'terminal emulation': only HTTP and HTTPS were marked PERMITTED. Note: the things calling themselves terms of service on Tooway's website are for the website, not for the service. For all I know the TOS has changed, in which case this comment is mostly of historical interest. :)
I thought maybe the prohibition was due to bandwidth considerations, given that this is satellite broadband, but they allow iPlayer... so I guess not. Maybe they're caching the hell out of something and don't like things that break it, but even so, the only thing they'd save on is bandwidth to and from their Italian downlink site, not to/from orbit, and to be honest if they can afford to contract with Eutelsat for satellite service they can damn well afford decent bandwidth to their downlink site!
It's not like they can rely on everyone viewing the same thing in iPlayer at the same time: they'll be using limited downlink bandwidth from orbit for every independent viewer. This is not multicast! And terminal service does not strain it, ffs. Certainly not more than all those ack packets for an iPlayer stream (and yes, the acks do flow back, or at least *something* flows back while you're watching iPlayer, so they don't have a special optimization for that case).
Posted Dec 26, 2014 15:17 UTC (Fri)
by Baylink (guest, #755)
[Link]
1) buyers should have beworn, or
but I understand your point of view (which, I suspect, is roughly that "retail customers can't be expected to understand the difference" and "I have shit to *do*". :-)
We weren't really talking about this particular edge case, though, I don't think.
Access to firewalled ports
2) they should get sued for not warning people that what they were advertising wasn't what they were selling,