Is anyone aware of a contract term, that we sign with the ISP while ordering our connection, or a govt body guideline(s) that states that the ISPs are well within their rights to block reserved ports like 80, 443, 23 and may be some others too?
I have a dynamic IP and these ports are blocked. I have read multiple posts where some static IP users are also complaining about the same.
It is akin to the corporation supplying water to your house and then forcing you to only use it for bathing and not filtering and drinking because they would like to up-sell/cross-sell bottled drinking water to you separately.
This seems a sinister tactic to up-sell the static IP. IMO, this is so regressive a thought given that IPv4 addresses are already in short supply and should not be wasted upon home users most of whom can safely make do with dynamic dns services on a dynamic IP.
Key question: Doesn't this curb our freedom of using the internet as we would like within the legal realms of the law of the land?
I am trying to battle this out with my ISP.
The experience and progress thus far over the last 2+ months -
1. The ground level engineers think the ports should be open, hence they try with all their might to test everything and prove it to you. They and their managers are surprised when they realize that the ports are indeed blocked. Some engineers are using some local cable internet at their own residence and they have found that their ISP doesn't block the ports.
2. When escalated to NOC level, the engineering team there also try their might to check everything and eventually say that they don't support this feature on dynamic IP. They too are surprised that some reserved ports are blocked. Then they suggest that I purchase a static IP.
3. Upon escalation with the appellate authorities and persisting with them for around 2 months, someone from the "backend" team from Gurgaon calls and he too tries a lot of configuration combinations so that the ports can be opened but fails and eventually gives up. So it is beyond "backend's" control as well. But no one upfront had a negative answer for me, which also means that they were completely unaware of this limitation that has been systemically imposed upon us.
4. Eventually Kolkata circle team tells Appellate that "as per Airtel policy" they don't support opening of ports on dynamic IPs and only when I chase Appellate again, do they verbally convey the same to me. No one ever responds to my queries over emails apart from a stereotype/automated acknowledgement that lands up in my mailbox within a few hours of my sending the n'th mail to nodal, appellate and 121 id. When I quizzed the Appellate authorities about sharing the "Airtel policy" or the "contract terms" or any "govt authority's directive", they were clueless and they told that they shall dig through their ranks again and revert to me by next Wednesday.
What has been your battle experience in this regard? Do you think we should raise our voice in this regard?
I have a dynamic IP and these ports are blocked. I have read multiple posts where some static IP users are also complaining about the same.
It is akin to the corporation supplying water to your house and then forcing you to only use it for bathing and not filtering and drinking because they would like to up-sell/cross-sell bottled drinking water to you separately.
This seems a sinister tactic to up-sell the static IP. IMO, this is so regressive a thought given that IPv4 addresses are already in short supply and should not be wasted upon home users most of whom can safely make do with dynamic dns services on a dynamic IP.
Key question: Doesn't this curb our freedom of using the internet as we would like within the legal realms of the law of the land?
I am trying to battle this out with my ISP.
The experience and progress thus far over the last 2+ months -
1. The ground level engineers think the ports should be open, hence they try with all their might to test everything and prove it to you. They and their managers are surprised when they realize that the ports are indeed blocked. Some engineers are using some local cable internet at their own residence and they have found that their ISP doesn't block the ports.
2. When escalated to NOC level, the engineering team there also try their might to check everything and eventually say that they don't support this feature on dynamic IP. They too are surprised that some reserved ports are blocked. Then they suggest that I purchase a static IP.
3. Upon escalation with the appellate authorities and persisting with them for around 2 months, someone from the "backend" team from Gurgaon calls and he too tries a lot of configuration combinations so that the ports can be opened but fails and eventually gives up. So it is beyond "backend's" control as well. But no one upfront had a negative answer for me, which also means that they were completely unaware of this limitation that has been systemically imposed upon us.
4. Eventually Kolkata circle team tells Appellate that "as per Airtel policy" they don't support opening of ports on dynamic IPs and only when I chase Appellate again, do they verbally convey the same to me. No one ever responds to my queries over emails apart from a stereotype/automated acknowledgement that lands up in my mailbox within a few hours of my sending the n'th mail to nodal, appellate and 121 id. When I quizzed the Appellate authorities about sharing the "Airtel policy" or the "contract terms" or any "govt authority's directive", they were clueless and they told that they shall dig through their ranks again and revert to me by next Wednesday.
What has been your battle experience in this regard? Do you think we should raise our voice in this regard?
