 |
KWSN Orbiting Fortress KWSN Distributed Computing Teams forum
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Sir Papa Smurph Cries like a little girl


Joined: 18 Jul 2006 Posts: 4430 Location: Michigan
|
Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:44 pm Post subject: AT&T blocking GpuGrid |
|
|
One of my remotes, My son's, will not connect to Gpugrid.net in anyway. I can't even get it to connect to their web page. The site is not down as I can connect to it on my other boxes (comcast) but when I remotely go to his comp it won't connect at all.
I believe that they are blocking it, but I can't be sure....
it does use quite a bit of bandwidth and their service is really quite slow.
Can they do this? I know that there is a bill before congress regarding Net Neutrality, but that is not law yet..... _________________ a.k.a. Licentious of Borg.........Resistance Really is Futile.......
and a Really Hoopy Frood who always knows where his Towel is...
 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Yankton Prince


Joined: 27 Sep 2008 Posts: 1702 Location: California
|
Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You know, I have AT&T DSL and I can't connect to GPUGRID at all anymore either. Been about a day now I think. If it is AT&T I may have to look at alternatives again - sadly I don't think there are any here. _________________ Some days are worse than others. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Nuadormrac Prince

Joined: 13 Sep 2009 Posts: 506
|
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
If you are on DSL, there are alternatives; given the telecommunications act of 1996. Basically the phone company (though AT&T is a long distance phone company, not likely the ILEC) requires them by law to allow compeitors on the phone wire.
If you have DSL already, then qualifications for DSL are out the window (you qualify to get it already). Only problem is they have to be disconnected from your phone circuit (you can't be plugged into their DSLAM), before your phone line can be connected through another. (You might be on a 1 year contract with AT&T where early termination fees could apply, on that not certain.) I used to have these people for DSL
http://www.speakeasy.net/
They're a lil pricier then some providers, but also have a rather liberal ToS with no AUP. Basically, as long as you don't hack into their network and crash their routers they're OK. There's no download limits, home networking is OK, servers run on your residential DSL line is considered fine, your own routers, yup go ahead, etc. They also didn't do any of this site/port blocking, and pretty much just provided a pipe; what you did with it was your business so long as you don't hack their network.
Any service contract with AT&T would have to be dealt with (service terminated) before someone else could connect you up though. They're a national ISP, so as long as Covad could get in there (as the CLEC) and get a loop back connection through the local phone company, it should go. But in the US, whatever DSL provider you chose to go with; the phone company can not prevent competitor's from being allowed on the phone wire, as long as they still want to receive federal subsidies for the telecommunications network, and it continues to be regulated (as it is) through the telecommunications commission.
Oh, and BTW, if your local phone carrier has a businesss partnership with AT&T for ISP service, that isn't a hinderance. When Qwest partnered with MSN, I was absolutely clear to Qwest that I will not use MSN as an ISP; also looking at reviews they were getting at
http://www.dslreports.com
at the time, and terminated service. I signed up with the above ISP, in which case Qwest did a loopback install for them, then Covad (the CLEC I had then) came out and hooked them up to their DSLAM, and reported back to speakeasy when it was done, who then configured their routers to receive my IP through the necessary port on the DSLAM, etc... It's all workable from a technical standpoint (and by law), as long as any existing contracts can be dealt with if there are any. _________________
. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Yankton Prince


Joined: 27 Sep 2008 Posts: 1702 Location: California
|
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
I will check it out, but it's less important now as I can communicate with gpugrid this morning.
Grazi!
 _________________ Some days are worse than others. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Nuadormrac Prince

Joined: 13 Sep 2009 Posts: 506
|
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, it's always possible that rather then intentionally blocking the site (which is not impossible, certainly work places can do it with sites they don't want their employees browsing, for which a proxy service can be your friend :p ), they were simply having a random DNS server problem...
Ya know? WoW.net uses AT&T don't they? If they have random problems like that as an ISP, it might explain a lot  _________________
. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
JerWA Prince


Joined: 01 Jan 2007 Posts: 1497 Location: WA, USA
|
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It was probably AT&Ts automated defense stuff. It's tripped on other sites before. Lots of two-way traffic to their network makes them suspicious hehe. _________________
Stats: [BOINC Synergy] - [Free-DC] - [MundayWeb] - [Netsoft] - [All Project Stats] |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Lloyd M. Prince

Joined: 02 Mar 2007 Posts: 521
|
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nuadormrac wrote: | then Covad (the CLEC I had then) came out and hooked them up to their DSLAM, and reported back to speakeasy when it was done, who then configured their routers to receive my IP through the necessary port on the DSLAM, etc... It's all workable from a technical standpoint (and by law), as long as any existing contracts can be dealt with if there are any. |
Huh - my ISP is Covad. _________________
 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|