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:
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

Show quoteHide quote

EW wrote:
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.

Rôgêr <ab***@your.isp.com> wrote in news:Y_WdnSQkkN9ax9rfRVn-
s*@pghconnect.com:

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

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

Rôgêr <ab***@your.isp.com> wrote in news:r82dnXn8luvmodrfRVn-
1*@pghconnect.com:

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.

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?

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

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 07:20:43 -0600, DanS
<t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a..n.e.t> wrote:

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, 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

Bandwidth Management and traffic shaping are the buzzwords.  There are
several methods.  The best of the bunch is to delay the ACK TCP
packet.  The IP stack thinks it is talking to a slow dialup modem when
the ACK's are delayed, and therefore slows down sending packets.  It
can also be done by simply dropping packets thus forcing a
retransmission.  However, that's gross, disgusting, and inefficient.
There are also various methods of QoS (Quality of Service) and MPLS
(Multi Protocol Label Switching) which are basically nice terms for
giving priority to time sensitive packets (i.e. VoIP) while delaying
other packets (web and email).

Here's more from those that sell the boxes:
  http://www.etinc.com/index.php?page=bwcompare.htm

http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/fqos_c/fqcprt2/qcfconmg.htm
There are lots of boxes that do bandwidth management (as well as
security and virus blocking).

I use (and abuse) a simple floppy based FreeBSD based program that
wasn't exactly designed for the purpose, but works well enough.
  http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/ip_dummynet/
It's also handy for simulating IP traffic congestion, anomalies, and
abominations.

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Show quoteHide quoteJust to clarify this, you must distinguish between "ack delay" and TCP
window shaping. Ack delay doesn't do much more than delaying the
original
data in a queue, because an ACK can't be sent until the data is
actually
received. Window shaping can actually get the sender to send less data;
the result is reduced traffic on your network, which reduces queue
depth
and smooths the flow of your entire network. The lower end "queue
management"
devices, such as dummynet, cisco and the stuff in linux, does not
improve
things for "other", non-managed traffic on your network. What is often
seen
when using those products is a perceived improvement in traffic for
managed
types, while screwing up everything else on the network. The reason is
that
queuing methods merely shift the latencies from one type of traffic to
another,
while true window shaping can actually reduce latencies for all
traffic.

Dennis
Emerging Technologies, Inc.

Alternatives to Netstumbler ?
D Link wireless security setup?
high powered marauder in area
Belkin Pre-N Report
Replacing Computer
Problems with WEP, Netgear WG511 and WG602
Is it possible to lock speed for a wireless connection?
Access point and router
Cellphone & wireless router combo
Atheros wireless card and Linksys router