Is this allowed?

[ian@huth]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

At&T showed a method that could be used for people on the outside of the router (the network end) to deduce how many computers are attached.. Will try a find a link to the paper they published, but IIRC it all hinged on how many types of traffic are being carried.

When a PC makes a request for information the request has to tell the target where to send the response. Packet inspection can determine the address of the originating request. Monitoring data to and from a specific account can therefore determine how many different devices are connected to that account during the period of monitoring.

[Ignition]

Originally Posted by ian@huth

When a PC makes a request for information the request has to tell the target where to send the response. Packet inspection can determine the address of the originating request. Monitoring data to and from a specific account can therefore determine how many different devices are connected to that account during the period of monitoring.

Nope, don't mean to seem rude Ian but saying that demonstrates you've no idea how NAT works.

The device doing the NAT rewrites the headers containing source address, replacing them with its' own address, to do otherwise would be impossible (IE how is a device on the other side of the internet supposed to know how to get to your private network without a public IP address?) and remembers what to send where by holding a state table of what packets are sourced from where and their destination.

Also to check on source address doesn't require packet inspection just the normal headers inspection that is done by all layer 3 routing devices.

On a properly firewalled & NAT'd installation, it is, to all intents and purposes, impossible to detect how many devices are behind it.

[punky]

Originally Posted by simpsonsFAN

I run the webhosting of a 1and1 dedicated server, and the dedicated servers that I sell are run by a freind on his business ADSL connection. On my home servers I run free image hosting, free webmail, my burnouthosting domain and a home domain off my ntl connections.
-Chris

Between all that, and WinMX, your clients' network connections must be flying.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by punky

Between all that, and WinMX, your clients' network connections must be flying.

Especially as a maxed-out upload can kill the download speed..

[handyman]

Originally Posted by simpsonsFAN

They know enough to know that 3mbit is faster than 1mbit,

Then they are wrong then as 3mbit is exactly the same speed as 1mbit which is the same speed as 300k. Its all the same connection with the same equipment.

I think you are trying to refer to bandwidth not speed, 2 different things.

Think of the network of pipes that brings water to your home and carries sewage away from it. Those pipes have different diameters -- the city's main water pipe may be 2 meters in diameter, whereas the kitchen faucet may be 2 centimeters. The width of the pipe measures the water-carrying capacity of the pipe. In this analogy the water is like information and the width of the pipe is like bandwidth. In fact, many networking experts will talk in terms of "putting in bigger pipes" meaning more bandwidth; that is, more information-carrying capacity

I have a fairly large network here running on a adsl 2mb connection. We have 3 laptops and 1 computer running from it. If i'm downloading on the computer it impacts the quality of service that the other users have. This is exponentially worse when I am uploading (as in your image and web hosting). I dont think you'll be giving out a service that at all justifies £10 per month. (and btw I do not condone what you are doing I hope the fine people at AUP discon you)

The reason you can have a 3mb connection for next to nothing when business's are paying through the roof for 2mbs leased lines and 128k ISDN is that as a residential user you are expected to be using the service less. Thats why they have a restriction in the amount of users you can connect to the service. You get the advantage of greater bandwidth allowing you to do what you do faster (remember it all travels the same speed) because you can get more data through the pipe at any one time.

[Millay]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

In my case, it's not that you are offering your connection to neighbours that disappoints me (as you say, that's not my business), but more that you are profiteering on pensioners, and offering them a deal that could be considerably worse than that offered by many ISPs.

Thats my point exactly, I couldnt care less if ten of your neighbours and you joined together to share one broadband connection, to me thats fine, wouldn't worry me a bit, its up to you, but making profit from pensioners who unwitingly are doing something wrong is just unfair, unjust and its just as bad as aconfidence trickster.

I work in the IT business self employed like yourself, I could not dream of doing what you are, if I had an elderly next door neigbour who wanted to get online to talk to theire child in australia, I would have no quarms in spending £6 on a wirless network card and letting them share my connection, and I dont think NTL would care either, but profiting from a connection from pensioners is disgusting, and out of interest what did you charge them as a set up charge, as you seem to think it costs £40 for a network card (wirless or not).

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Millay

Thats my point exactly, I couldnt care less if ten of your neighbours and you joined together to share one broadband connection, to me thats fine, wouldn't worry me a bit, its up to you, but making profit from pensioners who unwitingly are doing something wrong is just unfair, unjust and its just as bad as aconfidence trickster.

I work in the IT business self employed like yourself, I could not dream of doing what you are, if I had an elderly next door neigbour who wanted to get online to talk to theire child in australia, I would have no quarms in spending £6 on a wirless network card and letting them share my connection, and I dont think NTL would care either, but profiting from a connection from pensioners is disgusting, and out of interest what did you charge them as a set up charge, as you seem to think it costs £40 for a network card (wirless or not).

I hope that was aimed at Simpsonsfan..

[Millay]

Yes no of course it was aimed at simpsonfan sorry for any confision was just agreeing with you honest

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Millay

Yes no of course it was aimed at simpsonfan sorry for any confision was just agreeing with you honest

No problem.. I figured it was aimed at him... I don't share my connection with anyone outside my house (in fact I have WPA enabled and the SSID broadcast turned off, so it would be difficult for anyone who doesn't know me to get onto my network).

[Millay]

Im lazy and only use MAC Address filtering, If anyone whants the details to my bank accoun there welcome to them, there aint much they can get from that...

End of the day he is sharing and charging for his connection

That alone warrants a disconnection. I wonder what his parents will say when they go to watch sky one to find no picture because there son is sharing his connection to OAP's

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Millay

Im lazy and only use MAC Address filtering, If anyone whants the details to my bank accoun there welcome to them, there aint much they can get from that...

Actually, my main concern was that we have a rather large car park at the end of our garden, and when I first got a wireless network, quite a few Mac addresses popped up in the router logs that I didn't recognise. I suspect someone parked up in the car park and started using my network.

[Millay]

I must admit stuart, I am guilty of doing that, if im on the road all day, rather than using my mobile phone i'll just hook up to a wirless network and download my email from there.. not legal, but im only there for a few seconds.. and it saves my mobile phone bill..

[Pø†øƒGøL�]

I can't access that link on the other forum board - even tho I'm a reg'd member. Is it restricted access?