On 23/10/09 17:43 -0500, Justin Shore wrote:
It does block incoming SMTP traffic on that well known port.
Then the customer should have bought a class of service that permits servers.
That justification is a slippery slope. At what point do you draw the line on what constitutes business use? Is running a web server business use? A mail server? What about a server which participates in a peer to peer network? VPN? I certainly think you're within your right as a network operator to determine what is business use. I don't happen to feel that running a protocol server in and of itself meets that definition.
Would you consider restricting a customer's outgoing port 25 traffic to a specific mail server a step over the net neutrality line?
I do this all the time. For example I don't let my customers send or receive mail (or any traffic for that matter) from prefixes originating from AS32311 (Colorado spammer Scott Richter). Now if I was blocking mail to dnc.org, gop.com, greenpeace.org, etc or restricting Vonage to .05% of my bandwidth then yeah that would violate net neutrality principles. The difference is one stifles speech and is anti-competitive. The other mitigates a network security and stability risk.
I think I worded my question a bit wrong. I meant to hypothetically propose a common scenario: You only allow your customers to connect to your SMTP server, and if they attempt to connect to *any* other SMTP server, they are blocked or redirected to your SMTP server. -- Dan White