[CLUE-Talk] OpenSouce Friendly ISP [WAS Re: [CLUE-Tech] Easiest DHCP]

[Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier]

On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Randy Arabie wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier wrote:
>
> > I saw a commercial the other day making fun of DSL companies by
> > AT&T... I just thought that was some major chutzpah from a company
> > that left their customers in a lurch because they were trying
> > to play hardball with another company...
>
> When I get my website up I'm gonna post a letter I wrote to AT&T
> explaining my resons for dropping their service.  I was happy with
> them, and had no complaints about the service until the dissruption.

I've had some problems with AT&T, particularly the disruption, but
I couldn't bring myself to go back to Qworst. The choice is pretty
much between Evil 1 and Evil 2...

> > I understand, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't. If you
> > say "I use Linux" you've given them an excuse to refuse to support
> > anything (according to them, anyway -- "My modem burst into flames!"
> > "Sorry, sir, our records indicate you use Linux, which isn't supported.")
> > but if people don't go on record as using Linux it will never become
> > a supported option. Sigh.
>
> This thread on CLUE almost mirrors a similar discussion on a NetBSD
> list I subscribe to.  OpenSource OS users are "hiding" from their ISP,
> hoping their activities don't get noticed.  They know the ISP doesn't
> want to hear "Linux, BSD, or Unix" if they call with a problem.  And, they
> know their LAN nat'ed behind an OpenBSD box violates the "acceptable use"
> policy, and they know for certain they will get dropped if the ISP finds
> out they are running "servers" on that LAN.
>
> It makes me wonder why there are no "OpenSource OS" friendly ISP's.  Locally,
> here in Denver, there are so many out-of-work tech and telecomm people, it
> seems that a few could get together and start one.

Well, if anybody has the funds for a start-up, I'm available...

> I suppose there are OpenSource OS agnostic ISP's...I *think* mine is, as
> I've seen several people on the list who use them and I think there is
> even an employee who subscribes to this list.  However, I've never seen an
> ISP cater to the OpenSource crowd.

Actually, at least when I signed up, Earthlink was at least neutral
about Linux. Unfortunately, I can't get Earthlink DSL here because
they go through Covad. When I signed up for Earthlink dial-up after
moving to Denver, I called and told the guy that I was using Linux
and needed the basic info -- he was happy to give it to me and didn't
say anything about it being unsupported. Earthlink is also the
default client for the new Linux Internet appliance:
https://homebase.oeone.com/store/index.php?SCREEN=items/1

I guess that's sort-of catering...

> Is it too much of a niche market?  I doubt you could raise capital to
> become a national contender.  But what about a small local ISP here in
> Denver?  I would consider switching to an ISP who marketed themselves
> as OpenSource friendly.

I'd definitely switch if there was a Linux-friendly ISP with
high-speed (DSL or cable) access.

> I think the big catch here would be Qwest who holds all the cards in the
> DSL market.  I know they are the ones who forbid "server services"  on
> the DSL connection.  Likewise with cable.  So, the broadband, OpenSource
> friendly ISP would be left with dial-up and wireless.  And, I know the
> guys at TechAngle do wireless ISP, and are Linux (OpenSource) friendly.

Well, I think that might be an ISP policy, not a Qwest policy.
There are other ISPs who can offer DSL here, where Qwest provides
the line but the ISP provides everything else -- I'd be curious to
know what their policies are.

Take care,

Zonker
--
Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier -=- jbrockmeier at earthlink.net
http://www.DissociatedPress.net/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Computers are like Old Testament gods;
 lots of rules and no mercy." -- Joseph Campbell