On 4 Dec 2002 at 13:13, Bengt Gördén wrote:
> income. But I still think that ISP:s should have been lifted in their
> ear for inventing this "no server on the net"-thing. The problem is
> that the normal customer doesn't understand the fundamentals behind
> computing and communication. ISP:s take advantage of that. So
I think most of these no-server-on-the-net bans has its origin in the Internet-over-
cable-tv market where the upstream channel is limited and shared.
When using ethernet technology as connection method this is no longer the case. The
user will only swamp his own connection to the network, not the neighbourhood.
In fact, while at B2, we had no ban on servers at home. On the countrary, the more
data people send between themselves in the network the less they use expensive
I guess that some ISPs have continued to use the same service agreements for different
services and forgotten about the reason why that paragraph was put there in the first
place. I mean, what is really the "bad thing" with people having servers at home if
the capacity problem is taken out of the equation?
PacketFront Sweden AB