nanog mailing list archives
RE: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users"
From: "Borchers, Mark" <mborchers () splitrock net>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 13:52:26 -0600
If the ISP sells "unlimited" access, then customers have every right to use it without limit.
Indubitably. But customers are not free to pick and choose among which provisions of the service agreement they want to abide by. If the ISP provides unlimited access but limits the account to a single host, then that is the terms of service. The problem, as has been noted, is enforcement.
If the ISP places restrictions on what access is allowed and/or how long, then it is no longer an unlimited service, and it would be fraud to market it as such. ISPs count on customers not using all of what is sold to them; if they turn out to be wrong, that is a part of the risk they took. S
Current thread:
- RE: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users", (continued)
- RE: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Patrick (Jan 31)
- Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Nathan J. Mehl (Jan 31)
- Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Adrian Chadd (Jan 31)
- Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" E.B. Dreger (Jan 31)
- Message not available
- RE: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Daniel Senie (Jan 31)
- Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Stephen Griffin (Jan 31)
- RE: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Deepak Jain (Jan 31)
- Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Stephen Sprunk (Jan 31)
- Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Jon Mansey (Jan 31)
- RE: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users" Scott A Crosby (Jan 31)