PCEngines APU1D4 for sale... Perfect pfSense box!

From: Lynn Dixon 
------------------------------------------------------
Well everyone, I am selling my fairly new APU1D4.  I moved to Ooltewah, and
got the 1 gig service from EPB.  Unfortunately, this little APU doesnt have
the horsepower to handle a full 1 Gbps throughput.  I was routinely seeing
about 600 Mbps on the little guy but never could get it above 700 or so.

So, I picked up a Lanner FW-8760 off ebay, running an i7 processor and 16
gig ram, and it is able to handle routing traffic at a full 1 Gbps.  Thus,
I am selling the APU.

Its a great unit, with only a few hours of use on it. Runs pfSense like a
champ.  Just be aware, that it will only be able to route traffic at about
600 Mbps through its WAN interface.  Its really low power, at only about 12
watts.   I have added several options to this unit that I will sell with
it. Here is the full list of goods:

APU1D4 main board
Black enclosure built for the mainboard
Wall wart power supply
WLE200NX miniPCI express card  capable of 802.11b/g/n
Two dual band antennas and pigtails
80 gig Mini-PCIe SSD drive installed

I have about $275 invested in the kit, including the SSD.  I am asking $225
for the entire kit which is assembled and will come with a clean install of
the latest pfSense nightly on it.

You can get the details on the APU here:
http://store.netgate.com/kit-APU1C4.aspx  As well as price shop the
accessories I am including with it.

If your interested, give me an email at boodaddy@gmail.com and I will send
you my phone number.

Any suggestions for a good 802.11ac Access point?

From: Lynn Dixon 
------------------------------------------------------
Hey guys,
I am needing to upgrade my access point now that I am on EPB gig service.
I am using an APU1D4 running pfSense as my router, so I just need an access
point / Bridge for my wireless devices.

I'd like to have 802.11ac in both 2.4 and 5 ghz bands. POE would be nice,
but not a definate requirement. Doesn't have to be wall/celiing mountable
either.

Any good recommendations?  I'd like to have one that had multiple radios to
handle multiple simultaneous devices.  I am looking at some of the Ubiquity
units, but its in the $280 to $300 price range.

Does EPB sell or lease IPv4 addresses?

From: Lynn Dixon 
------------------------------------------------------
So, in my possibility of moving to Ooltewah, and getting EPB I have a
question for the LUG.

Does EPB sell/lease IP addresses to their residential customers?  I have a
/28 at Peace Communications as part of my Colocation, but it would be nice
to buy a /29 to use for my home lab, and a some other personal services.

I know we have some EPB guys on here, and was hoping someone could give me
some insight.

EPBfi already outside of city?

From: Rod-Lists 
------------------------------------------------------
Found this map of Municipal networks. Several Gigabit connections in North Ga are listed as EPB.
Including Flintstone and Wildwood.

http://www.muninetworks.org/communitymap

Ubiquity EdgeMax (ASG)

From: Mark Quering 
------------------------------------------------------
Hey all


I recently sold one of these units to a customer basically to give it a
try. Needless to say at the $100 price point I was pretty happy with the
device.

The unit has a pretty solid build quality. The web management interface is
a little rough out of the box. A firmware update helped quite a bit. I
haven't played in the CLI yet but I hear that EdgeOS is a fork of Vayatta.

The web interface worked well for a basic SOHO NAT setup with a few inbound
firewall rules. Been very stable for the two months it's been in a
production environment. I also did not get to fully test LAN to WAN
throughput of their network processor due to time constraints.

The only odd thing I noticed with the unit I deployed was that it generated
a fair bit of heat. More than I would expect. I also did not need to
contact support so I cannot speak to that aspect of the product. I would
say for the price it's definitely worth purchasing to play with.

Due to my experience with this product and good things I've heard here and
on other forums, I am seriously considering also offering their managed PoE
switches and AP's to my SMB offerings.


Best
Mark

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 5:24 PM,  wrote:

> Send Chugalug mailing list submissions to
>         chugalug@chugalug.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         chugalug-request@chugalug.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         chugalug-owner@chugalug.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Chugalug digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Ubiquity EdgeMax (ASG)
>    2. Re: Ubiquity EdgeMax (Dan Lyke)
>    3. Re: Storing Locations in MySQL (Ryan Bales)
>    4. Re: Storing Locations in MySQL (Ryan Bales)
>    5. Re: Storing Locations in MySQL (Dan Lyke)
>    6. Re: Ubiquity EdgeMax (Lynn Dixon)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:39:54 -0400
> From: ASG 
> To: Chattanooga Unix Gnu Android Linux Users Group
>         
> Subject: Re: [Chugalug] Ubiquity EdgeMax
> Message-ID:
>         
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> For $100 it?s worth a shot. What I would really love to find is something
> of the same size and price point that could run pfSense or m0n0wall. Anyone
> know of anything?
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> On Oct 15, 2014, at 4:21 PM, Dan Lyke  wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 1:13 PM, ASG 
> wrote:
> >> Any of you folks have experience with these
> >> http://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgerouter-lite/. Looking at
> >> one for my home office/lab network.
> >
> > Guy a few cube openings down from me whose job involves setting up
> > router-ish stuff at our fiber deployments says great things about 'em.
> >
> > I've been super impressed with my UniFi APs.
> >
> > Dan
> > 

Swapped...

From: Mike Harrison 
------------------------------------------------------

3+ hours of phone calls and Web Chat=92s (with 4 total people in one sessio=
n) with Comcast over basic simple account settings, convinced me to sign up=
 to EPB.. =


I feel like I need a bath.  =97Mike--




Protecting password files (was: Name Cheap under attack)

From: Dan Lyke 
------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 1 Sep 2014 21:41:13 -0400 (EDT)
Rod-Lists  wrote:
> http://community.namecheap.com/blog/2014/09/01/urgent-security-warning-may-affect-internet-users/

So I'm a Namecheap user, and, I'm slightly embarrassed to say, my
Namecheap password was one I've used on a few other sites (it's a
mid-tier password).

Obviously, I instantly went and changed it to something that came from
"pwgen 32".

Buuuuutttt... I have three password strategies:

1. A few I remember. Obviously this is not something I can use
   everywhere.

2. A few machines have a "passwords.txt" file in their documents
   directory.

3. I also have shared Firefox password storage.

#3 is awesome, except that  Firefox has broken this at least once, so I
always feel like that if I lose my laptop drive I could lose
everything, *and* I don't actually know how secure things are.

#2 is great if I were smart enough to put that file in git, and *then*
if I actually trusted that the machine I stored the git repos on wasn't
ever going to get compromised.

I'm unwilling to use a third party service for this because the cloud
is another name for "on someone else's computers at the whims of
someone else's security policies", ie: the most nebulous bits of #3.

So: What's the right way to put a passphrase on that passwords.txt
that'll go into a git repo? Something so that I can update it from
multiple places, diffs and merges are all handled reasonably, it's
backed up in multiple places, but I'm not exposing my on-line life on
exposed hosts?

Dan

Difference between EPBfi Residential & Commercial

From: Rod-Lists 
------------------------------------------------------
Other than Terms Of Service, static IP, and cost(which I have no idea of), what sets EPB Residential offerings for net from commercial net service?

ios remote support was lunch downtown today?

From: Sparky 
------------------------------------------------------
Apple has some config tools available. Maybe it has some kind of remote
config options for profiles or something?
http://www.apple.com/support/iphone/business/



On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Ed King  wrote:

> Thanks, thats a good summary article.  I forwarded it to McTightwad but he
> is still asking me to find a way to remotely configure iphone email.  We
> installed an in-house iredmail server last week.  Our old hosted email was
> POP now we have IMAP.   *Before* we made the switchover, we posted
> instructions [with screenshots] on how to reconfigure iphones for the new
> system, but the boss says we are asking too much from our field workers and
> that we should remotely configure their iphones for them.
>
> Excerpt from field worker job description:
>
> "Moderate to excellent computer ability."
> "Proven proficiency of modern equipment including cell phones, fax
> machines, scanners, computers, palm or other hand held devices, GPS, and
> printers."
>
> So are we expecting too much?   The documentation is clear and concise.  I
> had one field worker (a new guy) say it was the most helpful documentation
> he's ever read and offered to buy my lunch when he's in town.   Its the
> upper level folks who are having trouble following the directions.  Go
> figure.
>
> oh, sorry,  am I being negative?    Ok, I'll go home and stick my tongue
> to the Mac Plus flyback and get some positive electrons in me.
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 8/14/14, William Roush  wrote:
>
>  Subject: Re: [Chugalug] ios remote support  was Re:  lunch downtown today?
>  To: "Chattanooga Unix Gnu Android Linux Users Group"  chugalug@chugalug.org>
>  Date: Thursday, August 14, 2014, 3:35 PM
>
>  ScreenConnect wrote a
>  nice page about it:
>
>  http://www.screenconnect.com/Mobile-Device-Remote-Support
>
>  TL;DR: Apple is mean
>
>  William Roush
>  william.roush@roushtech.net
>  423-463-0592
>
>  http://www.roushtech.net/blog/
>
>
>  On 8/14/2014
>  1:54 PM, Ed King wrote:
>  > Walked down to
>  Doctor Bldg.     Sorry you didn't get to see
>  me!
>  >
>  >
>  > So...   whats the
>  "best" remote support solution for iphone? (eg: to
>  tap INTO the iphone)
>  >
>  > I can't find one that offers full
>  remote control w/o jailbreaking, so whats the next best
>  thing?   Looked at Logmein, Teamviewer, Bomgar so
>  far
>  >
>  > as this is for
>  Mr McTightwad, I'm looking for the most expensive
>  product available
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  --------------------------------------------
>  > On Thu, 8/14/14, Ed King 
>  wrote:
>  >
>  >   Subject: Re: [Chugalug] lunch
>  downtown today?
>  >   To:
>  "Chattanooga Unix Gnu Android Linux Users Group"
>  
>  >   Date: Thursday, August 14,
>  2014, 11:30 AM
>  >
>  >   maybe.   depends
>  on
>  >   where and when
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >   --------------------------------------------
>  >   On Thu, 8/14/14, Rod-Lists
>  
>  >   wrote:
>  >
>  >
>  Subject: [Chugalug]
>  >   lunch
>  downtown today?
>  >    To:
>  "Chattanooga
>  >   Unix Gnu
>  Android Linux Users Group" 
>  >    Date: Thursday, August 14, 2014,
>  10:01 AM
>  >
>  >
>    Whole office is on the
>  >   road.
>  >
>    Anyone up for lunch downtown?
>  >
>
>  >
>  >    Rod
>  >
>  >   

ios remote support was lunch downtown today?

From: Ed King 
------------------------------------------------------
Walked down to Doctor Bldg.     Sorry you didn't get to see me!


So...   whats the "best" remote support solution for iphone? (eg: to tap IN=
TO the iphone)

I can't find one that offers full remote control w/o jailbreaking, so whats=
 the next best thing?   Looked at Logmein, Teamviewer, Bomgar so far

as this is for Mr McTightwad, I'm looking for the most expensive product av=
ailable


--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 8/14/14, Ed King  wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Chugalug] lunch downtown today?
 To: "Chattanooga Unix Gnu Android Linux Users Group" 
 Date: Thursday, August 14, 2014, 11:30 AM
 =

 maybe.=A0=A0=A0depends on
 where and when
 =

 =

 =

 --------------------------------------------
 On Thu, 8/14/14, Rod-Lists 
 wrote:
 =

  Subject: [Chugalug]
 lunch downtown today?
  To: "Chattanooga
 Unix Gnu Android Linux Users Group" 
  Date: Thursday, August 14, 2014, 10:01 AM
  =

  Whole office is on the
 road.
  Anyone up for lunch downtown?
  =

  =

  Rod
 =

 

EPB Running Cat5 in homes for gig service??

From: David White 
------------------------------------------------------
I just moved and had a technician come out to do the EPB install (actually
he's still here as there might be a problem with the ONT).

He tried to tell me that you don't need Cat6 for sustained gig speeds and
that the standard EPB install, regardless of the speed you get (I ordered
the 100mb, so don't much care).

This doesn't sound right to me. I am surprised EPB isn't using Cat6 from
the fiber handoff to the RJ45 jack, especially for 1gb orders.

Thoughts?

Just Testing

From: Mike Harrison 
------------------------------------------------------

On Jul 24, 2014, at 2:46 PM, Alex Smith (K4RNT)  wrote:

> I think he was trying to invoke Godwin's Law, ending any conversation before they started. ;)


Alex Got It!  

I was also testing the categorization filter on the website. 

Vi/Emacs/Joe/Nano/Pico/Hitler/UFO/Redhat/Ubuntu/Mint/Bodhi/Debian/Android/Jobs/Salaries/EPB/Diesel/Chugalunch/Meeting

Some of those are keywords. 



Fwd: Linux Journal: Awesome Tech Magazine or Extremist Forum?

From: Jonathan Calloway 
------------------------------------------------------


Begin forwarded message:

> From: Linux Journal 
> Subject: Linux Journal: Awesome Tech Magazine or Extremist Forum?
> Date: July 8, 2014 at 8:00:46 AM EDT
> To: jonathancalloway@epbfi.com
> Reply-To: Linux Journal =

>=20
> Linux Journal: Awesome Tech Magazine or Extremist Forum?
> =20
>=20
> NSA: Linux Journal is an "extremist forum" and its readers get flagged =
for extra surveillance
> by Kyle Rankin
> A new story published on the German site Tagesschau and followed up by =
BoingBoing and DasErste.de has uncovered some shocking details about who =
the NSA targets for surveillance including visitors to Linux Journal =
itself.
>=20
> While it has been revealed before that the NSA captures just about all =
Internet traffic for a short time, the Tagesschau story provides new =
details about how the NSA's XKEYSCORE program decides which traffic to =
keep indefinitely. XKEYSCORE uses specific selectors to flag traffic, =
and the article reveals that Web searches for Tor and Tails--software =
I've covered here in Linux Journal that helps to protect a user's =
anonymity and privacy on the Internet--are among the selectors that will =
flag you as "extremist" and targeted for further surveillance. If you =
just consider how many Linux Journal readers have read our Tor and Tails =
coverage in the magazine, that alone would flag quite a few innocent =
people as extremist.
>=20
> While that is troubling in itself, even more troubling to readers on =
this site is that linuxjournal.com has been flagged as a selector! =
DasErste.de has published the relevant XKEYSCORE source code, and if you =
look closely at the rule definitions, you will see =
linuxjournal.com/content/linux* listed alongside Tails and Tor. =
According to an article on DasErste.de, the NSA considers Linux Journal =
an "extremist forum". This means that merely looking for any Linux =
content on Linux Journal, not just content about anonymizing software or =
encryption, is considered suspicious and means your Internet traffic may =
be stored indefinitely.
>=20
> One of the biggest questions these new revelations raise is why. Up =
until this point, I would imagine most Linux Journal readers had =
considered the NSA revelations as troubling but figured the NSA would =
never be interested in them personally. Now we know that just visiting =
this site makes you a target. While we may never know for sure what it =
is about Linux Journal in particular, the Boing Boing article speculates =
that it might be to separate out people on the Internet who know how to =
be private from those who don't so it can capture communications from =
everyone with privacy know-how. If that's true, it seems to go much =
further to target anyone with Linux know-how.
>=20
> It's bad news to all of us who use and read about Linux on a daily =
basis, but fortunately we aren't completely helpless. Earlier in the =
year I started a series on security, privacy and anonymity in my Hack =
and / column that included articles on how to use the Tor browser bundle =
and Tails. With either piece of software in place, you can browse Linux =
Journal (and the rest of the Internet) in private.
>=20
> Read this and other privacy-related stories at LinuxJournal.com.
>=20
> A Bundle of Tor
> Tails above the Rest: the Installation
> Tails above the Rest, Part II
> Are you an extremist?
> Dolphins in the NSA Dragnet
> Are you an extremist?
> Get the T-Shirt!
> Get the T-Shirt by itself or take advantage of our special (and =
temporary) offer and get a 1-year subscription with your shirt for just =
$10 more!
>=20
>=20
>=20
>  Follow us on Twitter | Like us on Facebook
> Copyright =A9 2013 Linux Journal, All rights reserved.
> Our mailing address is:
> Linux Journal
> 2121 Sage Road, Ste 395
> Houston, TX 77056
>  If you do not wish to receive further e-mails regarding Linux Journal =
products, please visit: =
http://linuxjournalservices.com/portal/unsubscribe/?V77Dxgls%2FB0Xo8NsY%2B=
qzRuMrEAEQbeqSA.=20
> =20
>=20

EPB Device pushing bad DNS settings?

From: David White 
------------------------------------------------------
This is a bit OT, but I will ask it anyway. I went to a client's office
first thing this morning due to internet being "down". I quickly determined
it was a DNS issue. The client didn't have their login to their D-Link
router. I reset to defaults, rebuilt the network, and upgraded firmware.

Internet was working again for somefolks. 20 minutes later, some folks were
down. I took out my spare Linksys router, built the network on that,
plugged everything in.

Everything worked. 10-15 minutes later, some (but not all) users already
reporting issues again. I determined everytime a PC was "down" that for
some reason its primary DNS server was set to 192.168.15.1 (which was
pushed to it by the router). That was a Cisco device (I checked) obviously
managed by EPB - basically the next hop from the client's router, although
the external IP address was correctly assigned to the client's router.

(The client's network was 192.168.0.0/24 by the way)

I told the client even before I arrived that I had to be out by 10:00am
sharp. Under a time crunch, and nearing 10:30, I finally just went around
to eaxh machine and manually entered 8.8.8.8 as the primary DNS server (and
yes, I assigned Google's DNS servers to both the d-link and then the spare
linksys router too).

But for some reason that stupid 192.168.15.1 address kept getting assigned
via DHCP as the DNS server.

Ultimately,  this sounds like an issue EPB needs to deal with. Thoughts? Am
I missing something obvious?

Issues started happening a few days ago...

Redefining broadband as common carrier, was: "How to throttle the FCC to dial up modem speeds on your website using Ngin

From: Stephen Kraus 
------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, I'd rather have the more modern and less corrupt devils than the ones
that I know are already sold hook, line, and sinker.


On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Billy  wrote:

> You're trading your devils for different versions...
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 18, 2014, at 6:48 PM, Stephen Kraus  wrote:
>
> Comcast can burn in hell. EPB and Google Fiber will save the day.
>
>
> On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Rod  wrote:
>
>>
>> As someone who is sometimes active in the EMA community , the fact that
>> we might just throw away that copper infrastructure scares me.
>> A lot of times in a disaster there is no home power but the copper
>> twisted pair still just works.
>>
>> As to your second point I give you that. Until EPB , I didn't have choice
>> AT&T doesn't even offer DSL at my current location.
>> I will give comcast this one point. The do have local customer service.
>> Ma Bell hasn't had that in Chattanooga in a long time.
>> In fact my sister law had to move to Nashville when Bellsouth moved all
>> those jobs to Nashville.
>>
>> Rod
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 18 May 2014 13:29:20 -0400, Joseph Simoneau > joseph.simoneau@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> That's an interesting idea, rob. But, given what's been happening over
>> the last couple years and the history of what happened to the POTS
>> controls, do you really think ANYBODY would go for that?
>>
>> I just want somebody other than Comcast to come to my apartment so I can
>> threaten them with switching if they try to charge me for not fixing
>> something again.
>>
>> -js
>> On May 18, 2014 11:02 AM, "Rod"  wrote:
>>
>>> Which is why I have thought since the 90's that cities should run fiber
>>> to home the rent it out to comcast, charter, epb etc.
>>> Unlike water pipes fiber can handle more than one utility.
>>>
>>> On Sun, 18 May 2014 10:33:41 -0400, Robert A. Kelly III >> bluethegrappler@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>  On 05/17/2014 11:31 PM, Rod wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://blogs.hbr.org/2014/05/understanding-the-new-battle-over-net-neutrality/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 17 May 2014 18:16:09 -0400, Robert A. Kelly III
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  On 05/12/2014 09:21 AM, Rod wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Shouldn't we push the FCC to redifine broadband as common carrier.
>>>>>>> They
>>>>>>> CAN do that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What exactly are the implications of redefining it as common carrier?
>>>>>> Is
>>>>>> this a good way to protect net neutrality?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> That was an interesting read. On the surface it sounds like classifying
>>>> broadband as common carrier would be a good thing. But then it sounds
>>>> like there is some provision requiring ISPs to allow others to use their
>>>> network, something along the lines of having Mediacom run lines to my
>>>> home but being able to choose Comcast as my ISP, but I'm not sure how
>>>> that sort of arrangement would work. It sounds like there is some
>>>> concern that this would remove incentive from ISPs to build out
>>>> infrastructure, which is something we would clearly rather encourage. So
>>>> I'm still not sure if reclassifying broadband is a good solution.
>>>>
>>>> 

Redefining broadband as common carrier, was: "How to throttle the FCC to dial up modem speeds on your website using Ngin

From: Billy 
------------------------------------------------------
You're trading your devils for different versions...

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 18, 2014, at 6:48 PM, Stephen Kraus  wrote:=

>=20
> Comcast can burn in hell. EPB and Google Fiber will save the day.
>=20
>=20
>> On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Rod  wrote:
>>=20
>> As someone who is sometimes active in the EMA community , the fact that w=
e might just throw away that copper infrastructure scares me.
>> A lot of times in a disaster there is no home power but the copper twiste=
d pair still just works.
>>=20
>> As to your second point I give you that. Until EPB , I didn't have choice=
 AT&T doesn't even offer DSL at my current location.
>> I will give comcast this one point. The do have local customer service. M=
a Bell hasn't had that in Chattanooga in a long time.
>> In fact my sister law had to move to Nashville when Bellsouth moved all t=
hose jobs to Nashville.
>>=20
>> Rod
>>=20
>>=20
>> On Sun, 18 May 2014 13:29:20 -0400, Joseph Simoneau  wrote:
>>=20
>> That's an interesting idea, rob. But, given what's been happening over th=
e last couple years and the history of what happened to the POTS controls, d=
o you really think ANYBODY would go for that?
>>=20
>> I just want somebody other than Comcast to come to my apartment so I can t=
hreaten them with switching if they try to charge me for not fixing somethin=
g again.
>>=20
>> -js
>>=20
>>> On May 18, 2014 11:02 AM, "Rod"  wrote:
>>> Which is why I have thought since the 90's that cities should run fiber t=
o home the rent it out to comcast, charter, epb etc.
>>> Unlike water pipes fiber can handle more than one utility.
>>>=20
>>> On Sun, 18 May 2014 10:33:41 -0400, Robert A. Kelly III  wrote:
>>>=20
>>>>> On 05/17/2014 11:31 PM, Rod wrote:
>>>>> http://blogs.hbr.org/2014/05/understanding-the-new-battle-over-net-neu=
trality/
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>> On Sat, 17 May 2014 18:16:09 -0400, Robert A. Kelly III
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> On 05/12/2014 09:21 AM, Rod wrote:
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> Shouldn't we push the FCC to redifine broadband as common carrier. T=
hey
>>>>>>> CAN do that.
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> What exactly are the implications of redefining it as common carrier?=
 Is
>>>>>> this a good way to protect net neutrality?
>>>>=20
>>>> That was an interesting read. On the surface it sounds like classifying=

>>>> broadband as common carrier would be a good thing. But then it sounds
>>>> like there is some provision requiring ISPs to allow others to use thei=
r
>>>> network, something along the lines of having Mediacom run lines to my
>>>> home but being able to choose Comcast as my ISP, but I'm not sure how
>>>> that sort of arrangement would work. It sounds like there is some
>>>> concern that this would remove incentive from ISPs to build out
>>>> infrastructure, which is something we would clearly rather encourage. S=
o
>>>> I'm still not sure if reclassifying broadband is a good solution.
>>>>=20
>>>> 

Redefining broadband as common carrier, was: "How to throttle the FCC to dial up modem speeds on your website using Ngin

From: Stephen Kraus 
------------------------------------------------------
Comcast can burn in hell. EPB and Google Fiber will save the day.


On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Rod  wrote:

>
> As someone who is sometimes active in the EMA community , the fact that we
> might just throw away that copper infrastructure scares me.
> A lot of times in a disaster there is no home power but the copper twisted
> pair still just works.
>
> As to your second point I give you that. Until EPB , I didn't have choice
> AT&T doesn't even offer DSL at my current location.
> I will give comcast this one point. The do have local customer service. Ma
> Bell hasn't had that in Chattanooga in a long time.
> In fact my sister law had to move to Nashville when Bellsouth moved all
> those jobs to Nashville.
>
> Rod
>
>
> On Sun, 18 May 2014 13:29:20 -0400, Joseph Simoneau  joseph.simoneau@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> That's an interesting idea, rob. But, given what's been happening over the
> last couple years and the history of what happened to the POTS controls, do
> you really think ANYBODY would go for that?
>
> I just want somebody other than Comcast to come to my apartment so I can
> threaten them with switching if they try to charge me for not fixing
> something again.
>
> -js
> On May 18, 2014 11:02 AM, "Rod"  wrote:
>
>> Which is why I have thought since the 90's that cities should run fiber
>> to home the rent it out to comcast, charter, epb etc.
>> Unlike water pipes fiber can handle more than one utility.
>>
>> On Sun, 18 May 2014 10:33:41 -0400, Robert A. Kelly III > bluethegrappler@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>  On 05/17/2014 11:31 PM, Rod wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://blogs.hbr.org/2014/05/understanding-the-new-battle-over-net-neutrality/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 17 May 2014 18:16:09 -0400, Robert A. Kelly III
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  On 05/12/2014 09:21 AM, Rod wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Shouldn't we push the FCC to redifine broadband as common carrier.
>>>>>> They
>>>>>> CAN do that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What exactly are the implications of redefining it as common carrier?
>>>>> Is
>>>>> this a good way to protect net neutrality?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> That was an interesting read. On the surface it sounds like classifying
>>> broadband as common carrier would be a good thing. But then it sounds
>>> like there is some provision requiring ISPs to allow others to use their
>>> network, something along the lines of having Mediacom run lines to my
>>> home but being able to choose Comcast as my ISP, but I'm not sure how
>>> that sort of arrangement would work. It sounds like there is some
>>> concern that this would remove incentive from ISPs to build out
>>> infrastructure, which is something we would clearly rather encourage. So
>>> I'm still not sure if reclassifying broadband is a good solution.
>>>
>>> 

Redefining broadband as common carrier, was: "How to throttle the FCC to dial up modem speeds on your website using Ngin

From: Rod 
------------------------------------------------------

As someone who is sometimes active in the EMA community , the fact that we  
might just throw away that copper infrastructure scares me.
A lot of times in a disaster there is no home power but the copper twisted  
pair still just works.

As to your second point I give you that. Until EPB , I didn't have choice  
AT&T doesn't even offer DSL at my current location.
I will give comcast this one point. The do have local customer service. Ma  
Bell hasn't had that in Chattanooga in a long time.
In fact my sister law had to move to Nashville when Bellsouth moved all  
those jobs to Nashville.

Rod


On Sun, 18 May 2014 13:29:20 -0400, Joseph Simoneau  
 wrote:

>
> That's an interesting idea, rob. But, given what's been happening over  
> the last couple years and the history of what happened to the POTS  
> controls, do you really think ANYBODY would go for >that?
>
> I just want somebody other than Comcast to come to my apartment so I can  
> threaten them with switching if they try to charge me for not fixing  
> something again.
> -js
> On May 18, 2014 11:02 AM, "Rod"  wrote:
>> Which is why I have thought since the 90's that cities should run fiber  
>> to home the rent it out to comcast, charter, epb etc.
>> Unlike water pipes fiber can handle more than one utility.
>>
>> On Sun, 18 May 2014 10:33:41 -0400, Robert A. Kelly III  
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/17/2014 11:31 PM, Rod wrote:
>>>> http://blogs.hbr.org/2014/05/understanding-the-new-battle-over-net-neutrality/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 17 May 2014 18:16:09 -0400, Robert A. Kelly III
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 05/12/2014 09:21 AM, Rod wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Shouldn't we push the FCC to redifine broadband as common carrier.  
>>>>>> They
>>>>>> CAN do that.
>>>>>
>>>>> What exactly are the implications of redefining it as common  
>>>>> carrier? Is
>>>>> this a good way to protect net neutrality?
>>>
>>> That was an interesting read. On the surface it sounds like classifying
>>> broadband as common carrier would be a good thing. But then it sounds
>>> like there is some provision requiring ISPs to allow others to use  
>>> their
>>> network, something along the lines of having Mediacom run lines to my
>>> home but being able to choose Comcast as my ISP, but I'm not sure how
>>> that sort of arrangement would work. It sounds like there is some
>>> concern that this would remove incentive from ISPs to build out
>>> infrastructure, which is something we would clearly rather encourage.  
>>> So
>>> I'm still not sure if reclassifying broadband is a good solution.
>>>
>>> 

Redefining broadband as common carrier, was: "How to throttle the FCC to dial up modem speeds on your website using Ngin

From: Joseph Simoneau 
------------------------------------------------------
That's an interesting idea, rob. But, given what's been happening over the
last couple years and the history of what happened to the POTS controls, do
you really think ANYBODY would go for that?

I just want somebody other than Comcast to come to my apartment so I can
threaten them with switching if they try to charge me for not fixing
something again.

-js
On May 18, 2014 11:02 AM, "Rod"  wrote:

> Which is why I have thought since the 90's that cities should run fiber to
> home the rent it out to comcast, charter, epb etc.
> Unlike water pipes fiber can handle more than one utility.
>
> On Sun, 18 May 2014 10:33:41 -0400, Robert A. Kelly III  bluethegrappler@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  On 05/17/2014 11:31 PM, Rod wrote:
>>
>>> http://blogs.hbr.org/2014/05/understanding-the-new-battle-
>>> over-net-neutrality/
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 17 May 2014 18:16:09 -0400, Robert A. Kelly III
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>  On 05/12/2014 09:21 AM, Rod wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Shouldn't we push the FCC to redifine broadband as common carrier. They
>>>>> CAN do that.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What exactly are the implications of redefining it as common carrier? Is
>>>> this a good way to protect net neutrality?
>>>>
>>>
>> That was an interesting read. On the surface it sounds like classifying
>> broadband as common carrier would be a good thing. But then it sounds
>> like there is some provision requiring ISPs to allow others to use their
>> network, something along the lines of having Mediacom run lines to my
>> home but being able to choose Comcast as my ISP, but I'm not sure how
>> that sort of arrangement would work. It sounds like there is some
>> concern that this would remove incentive from ISPs to build out
>> infrastructure, which is something we would clearly rather encourage. So
>> I'm still not sure if reclassifying broadband is a good solution.
>>
>> 

Redefining broadband as common carrier, was: "How to throttle the FCC to dial up modem speeds on your website using Ngin

From: Rod 
------------------------------------------------------
Which is why I have thought since the 90's that cities should run fiber to  
home the rent it out to comcast, charter, epb etc.
Unlike water pipes fiber can handle more than one utility.

On Sun, 18 May 2014 10:33:41 -0400, Robert A. Kelly III  
 wrote:

> On 05/17/2014 11:31 PM, Rod wrote:
>> http://blogs.hbr.org/2014/05/understanding-the-new-battle-over-net-neutrality/
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 17 May 2014 18:16:09 -0400, Robert A. Kelly III
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/12/2014 09:21 AM, Rod wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Shouldn't we push the FCC to redifine broadband as common carrier.  
>>>> They
>>>> CAN do that.
>>>
>>> What exactly are the implications of redefining it as common carrier?  
>>> Is
>>> this a good way to protect net neutrality?
>
> That was an interesting read. On the surface it sounds like classifying
> broadband as common carrier would be a good thing. But then it sounds
> like there is some provision requiring ISPs to allow others to use their
> network, something along the lines of having Mediacom run lines to my
> home but being able to choose Comcast as my ISP, but I'm not sure how
> that sort of arrangement would work. It sounds like there is some
> concern that this would remove incentive from ISPs to build out
> infrastructure, which is something we would clearly rather encourage. So
> I'm still not sure if reclassifying broadband is a good solution.
>
>