Clearwire Lame??

Does anyone here use the new Clearwire WiMax Internet service -- the fast,
inexpensive, simple internet service available in a few cities? I
understand that they block Ports 25, Port 80, file sharing ports, and
perhaps streaming video and audio! WTF? If so, what's the point of their
Internet "service?" Anything from anyone? I was going to switch, but not
any more.

RG

EW wrote:
> Does anyone here use the new Clearwire WiMax Internet service -- the fast,
> inexpensive, simple internet service available in a few cities? I
> understand that they block Ports 25, Port 80, file sharing ports, and
> perhaps streaming video and audio! WTF? If so, what's the point of their
> Internet "service?" Anything from anyone? I was going to switch, but not
> any more.

I don't understand why they would block ports 25 and 80, but I don't
blame them even a little bit for blocking file sharing ports. I hate it
when some dickhead is so busy stealing copyrighted material (yes, yes, I
know it's not all copyrighted material, maybe only 99.9%) that he clogs
up the whole network for everybody. As for streaming audio and video, it
can be as bad a problem as file sharing, but not usually. Clearstream
has to buy their bandwidth from their competitors, normally the big
telcos. It isn't cheap for this bandwidth and letting someone hog an
inordinate amount compared to what they're paying per month doesn't make
business sense.

I agree with your comments about file sharing ports. And with a bit of
research I "think" port 80 handles web hosting and port 25 may only handle
SMTP mail servers, both of which I won't use. But the streaming thing is
serious to me -- I like to stream news reports from places like Foxnews and
MSNBC. In any case, thanks for the reply. Also note that I'm talking about
Clearwire, not Clearstream.
Regards..........

EW

"Rôgêr" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:r82dnXn8luvmodrfRVn-(E-Mail Removed)...
> EW wrote:
>> Does anyone here use the new Clearwire WiMax Internet service -- the
>> fast, inexpensive, simple internet service available in a few cities? I
>> understand that they block Ports 25, Port 80, file sharing ports, and
>> perhaps streaming video and audio! WTF? If so, what's the point of
>> their Internet "service?" Anything from anyone? I was going to switch,
>> but not any more.
>
> I don't understand why they would block ports 25 and 80, but I don't blame
> them even a little bit for blocking file sharing ports. I hate it when
> some dickhead is so busy stealing copyrighted material (yes, yes, I know
> it's not all copyrighted material, maybe only 99.9%) that he clogs up the
> whole network for everybody. As for streaming audio and video, it can be
> as bad a problem as file sharing, but not usually. Clearstream has to buy
> their bandwidth from their competitors, normally the big telcos. It isn't
> cheap for this bandwidth and letting someone hog an inordinate amount
> compared to what they're paying per month doesn't make business sense.

EW wrote:
> I agree with your comments about file sharing ports. And with a bit of
> research I "think" port 80 handles web hosting and port 25 may only handle
> SMTP mail servers, both of which I won't use. But the streaming thing is
> serious to me -- I like to stream news reports from places like Foxnews and
> MSNBC. In any case, thanks for the reply. Also note that I'm talking about
> Clearwire, not Clearstream.

Clearwire, my faux pas.

If you send email, you use port 25 unless whoever hosts your email did
something different. And if you visit websites you use port 80.

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 16:14:26 -0600, "EW" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Does anyone here use the new Clearwire WiMax Internet service -- the fast,
>inexpensive, simple internet service available in a few cities? I
>understand that they block Ports 25, Port 80, file sharing ports, and
>perhaps streaming video and audio! WTF? If so, what's the point of their
>Internet "service?" Anything from anyone? I was going to switch, but not
>any more.

Clearwire is also allegedly blocking VoIP from Vonage to favour their
own VoIP service:
http://www.advancedippipeline.com/159905772
http://www.advancedippipeline.com/60404589
It's too soon for Clearwire to respond to the accusation.

Outgoing port 25 blocking is very common for broadband providers.
However, any others are rather unusual. Got any specific port numbers
or services that don't work with Clearwire? Outgoing or Incoming?


--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS 831-336-2558

"EW" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> Does anyone here use the new Clearwire WiMax Internet service -- the
> fast, inexpensive, simple internet service available in a few cities?
> I understand that they block Ports 25, Port 80, file sharing ports,
> and perhaps streaming video and audio! WTF? If so, what's the point
> of their Internet "service?" Anything from anyone? I was going to
> switch, but not any more.
>
> RG
>
>

Wow....first time I've EVER seen Clearwire mentioned here.

I am a former employee of the 'startup' Clearwire, before it was
purchased. Originally the business plan was to provide service for
commercial customers.

If indeed they do block port's 80 and 25, I would assume it's incoming
connections that are blocked, so you don't run an SMTP server or web
server from your home. Most broadband connections forbid this in the
customer-agreement anyway.

File-sharing totally kills bandwidth, wired or wireless.

My question is really, how well does it work? CW designed and deployed
their own proprietary equipment in the networks before the purchase. The
original OEM equipment was 2.4 ghz, a bit slow, but the design offered a
25 mile link distance, at full bandwidth with no speed degradation. Also,
the OEM stuff was not just a wireless bridge but an actual router. With
residential wireless, the biggest issue with subscriber's is having a big
ugly antenna at their location. With the buyout, and a switch to the
current hardware, that requirement was supposed to be minimized and most
are supposedly able to use this small little box with it's own antenna.
I'm just wondering how well it works.

Regards,

DanS

Rôgêr <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:r82dnXn8luvmodrfRVn-
(E-Mail Removed):

> I don't understand why they would block ports 25 and 80, but I don't
> blame them even a little bit for blocking file sharing ports.

Port 25 is blocked on a lot of ISPs so people can't run spam servers : )

HTTP - same thing, a lot of novice users end up running an IIS server which
gets hacked and starts spamming code red or something similar.

--
Lucas Tam ((E-Mail Removed))
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/

Rôgêr <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:Y_WdnSQkkN9ax9rfRVn-
(E-Mail Removed):

> And if you visit websites you use port 80.

Clearwire may blocking incoming port 80 requests to prevent web hosting.

Blocking incoming connections won't prevent you from surfing the web.

--
Lucas Tam ((E-Mail Removed))
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 07:20:43 -0600, DanS
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>My question is really, how well does it work? CW designed and deployed
>their own proprietary equipment in the networks before the purchase. The
>original OEM equipment was 2.4 ghz, a bit slow, but the design offered a
>25 mile link distance, at full bandwidth with no speed degradation. Also,
>the OEM stuff was not just a wireless bridge but an actual router. With
>residential wireless, the biggest issue with subscriber's is having a big
>ugly antenna at their location. With the buyout, and a switch to the
>current hardware, that requirement was supposed to be minimized and most
>are supposedly able to use this small little box with it's own antenna.
>I'm just wondering how well it works.

I'm not a Clearwire customer or employee, but think I can guess how it
works. Blocking incoming ports (to the customer) does not require
anything at the customer end. It's done by the central router which
is probably some very big Cisco or equivalent monster router. All it
needs to do is look at the incoming ethernet packets, inspect the
destination port number (i.e. 80) and just drop the packet. Nothing
on port 80 ever gets transmitted or arrives at the customers.

Dealing with outgoing port 25 blocking is a bit more difficult. One
could easily have the big central router do all the work in the same
way. However, that means that the packets destined to port 25 will be
transmitted by the client radio before getting dropped by the central
router. That's a waste of precious airtime. If the CPE (customer
premisis equipment) really does have a built in router, then outgoing
port 25 packets are best dropped at the source. The mechanism is the
same. The router inspects the destination port number and drops
anything on port 25. I can't tell from here which way outgoing port
blocking is implemented. It might also be both at the central router
and the CPE router. If there's no CPE router, then it all has to be
done at the central router.

What I find interesting is that Clearwire is apparently also blocking
ports used by Vonage VoIP SIP phones. Since Clearwire is not a common
carrier, there's no legal restriction preventing this practice.
However, in my never humble political opinion, they're just asking to
get legislated into the ground in the upcoming revision to the Telecom
Act which will include VoIP guidelines. It also begs the question of
"what's next?" Are they going to filter VPN's, streaming video, file
sharing, and competitors web sites? Maybe they won't absolutely block
services, but simply slow them down? These have been tried by other
ISP's with universally dismal results.
--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Jeff Liebermann" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> What I find interesting is that Clearwire is apparently also blocking
> ports used by Vonage VoIP SIP phones. Since Clearwire is not a common
> carrier, there's no legal restriction preventing this practice.
> However, in my never humble political opinion, they're just asking to
> get legislated into the ground in the upcoming revision to the Telecom
> Act which will include VoIP guidelines. It also begs the question of
> "what's next?" Are they going to filter VPN's, streaming video, file
> sharing, and competitors web sites? Maybe they won't absolutely block
> services, but simply slow them down? These have been tried by other
> ISP's with universally dismal results.
> --

Jeff, thank you, and all the others who provided lots of good info. I get
the stuff about the blocked ports (finally) but one final question please.
In your apparently knowledgable opinion, how would Clearwire, or anyone,
slow or block streaming media without totally restricting the customer's
bandwidth? This wouldn't be a port limitation, so......... how?

Bottom line, I guess I'll just stay with my "overpriced" broadband
fixed-wireless provider who limits absolutely nothing!

EW