<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/0.11.99">
</HEAD>
<BODY>On Mon, 2001-08-27 at 10:58, Stephen Denny wrote:<br>
<pre><FONT COLOR="#1a1973">> This port 80 blocking began about 3 weeks ago, but it doesn't seem to have </FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#1a1973">> been universally implemented across the country yet. AT&T did issue a </FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#1a1973">> statement regarding it. Sorry I don't have a link handy.</FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#1a1973">> </FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#1a1973">> As I recall, the statement said that these ports were not needed for the </FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#1a1973">> consumer service they were selling. My guess is they will use this </FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#1a1973">> opportunity to permanently block inbound port 80 (web) and 25 (mail).</FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#1a1973">> </FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#1a1973">> Regards,</FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#1a1973">> </FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#1a1973">> Stephen Denny</FONT></pre>FYI I found the link, although I do not agree with it. If I had a web server up making profit, I would agree, but a personal web server, or personal FTP or telnet is not unreasonable. Just my 2 cents.<br>
<br>
<br>
<A HREF="http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">http://home-members.excite.com/m_policies/attrulesoftheroad.html</A><br>
<A HREF="http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss"></A><br>
<A HREF="http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss"></A><pre> ,,,,
(O O)
+oOO-------(_)-----------+
| Patrick Parks |
| www.patrickparks.com |
|patrick@patrickparks.com|
+---------------------oOO+
| | |
|__| |__|
|| ||
ooO Ooo</pre></BODY>
</HTML>