[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Thank you, Comcast.

Subject: Thank you, Comcast.
From: Jason_Livingood at comcast.com (Livingood, Jason)
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 19:32:10 +0000
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <D2F5D3C1.129888%[email protected]> <[email protected]>

On 2/26/16, 11:44 AM, "Blake Hudson" <blake at ispn.net<mailto:blake at ispn.net>> wrote:
Jason, how do you propose to block SSDP without also blocking legitimate traffic as well (since SSDP uses a port > 1024 and is used as part of the ephemeral port range on some devices) ?

As Roland suggested, very likely via UDP/1900. This will obviously be disclosed in advance to customers and tested thoroughly. I believe a few other ISPs have already taken this step.

And is this practice Open Internet friendly?

Port blocking is considered a form of reasonable network management provided it can be justified by security or operational stability reasons. Of course it must also be transparently disclosed and so on.

Jason

Follow-Ups:
- Thank you, Comcast.
  - From: blake at ispn.net (Blake Hudson)

References:
- Thank you, Comcast.
  - From: mcole.mailinglists at gmail.com (Maxwell Cole)
- Thank you, Comcast.
  - From: kmedcalf at dessus.com (Keith Medcalf)
- Thank you, Comcast.
  - From: Jason_Livingood at comcast.com (Livingood, Jason)
- Thank you, Comcast.
  - From: blake at ispn.net (Blake Hudson)

Prev by Date: Thank you, Comcast.
Next by Date: Consumer Equipment Sucks (Re: Thank you, Comcast.)
Previous by thread: Thank you, Comcast.
Next by thread: Thank you, Comcast.
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread