Prev: Windows XP keeps trying to re-install printer
Next: Windows cannot copy file. The filename or extension is too lon
From: Sid Elbow on 29 Oct 2009 17:10
John John - MVP wrote:
> My telco would never try a
> stunt like that, as I said they are more business oriented.
Your telco must be someone other than Bell. I wouldn't put anything past
them after their latest shenanigans ... opening packet headers and
throttling based on traffic type not only their own (Sympatico)
customers but those of third-party ISP's who are forced to use Bell's
From: Sid Elbow on 29 Oct 2009 17:19
John John - MVP wrote:
> Well, as an aside subject, for security reasons I wouldn't connect to
> the internet without going through a NAT router, passing through NAT is
> probably one of the biggest security measures that you can take when
> connecting to the internet.
I'll second that ... and a basic router isn't exactly expensive these
days, especially from Craigslist (assuming you can find one amongst the
From: PA Bear [MS MVP] on 29 Oct 2009 17:14
From your headers: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
I'd get that WinXP SP1 box fully-patched at Windows Update before worrying
about the physical address of Ethernet Adapter if I were you, d00d!
HOW TO get a computer running WinXP SP1(a) or SP2 fully patched
NB: Computers running WinXP SP2 will NOT be offered any further critical
security updates, Automatic Updates will cease to function, and Windows
Update website will not be available after 12 April 2010 until SP3 is
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Client - since 2002
> is there a way to change physical address of Ethernet Adapter which shows
> in ipconfig /all like 00-11-2F-00-11-2D ?
> My Internet provider uses this address to set something on their end
> manually. For the moment I am testing another computer and every time I
> switch between the two computers I have to call the provider
From: John John - MVP on 29 Oct 2009 20:41
Sid Elbow wrote:
> John John - MVP wrote:
>> My telco would never try a stunt like that, as I said they are more
>> business oriented.
> Your telco must be someone other than Bell. I wouldn't put anything past
> them after their latest shenanigans ... opening packet headers and
> throttling based on traffic type not only their own (Sympatico)
> customers but those of third-party ISP's who are forced to use Bell's
We 'were' Aliant which was formerly NBTel, in its days NBTel was one of
the most advanced telco in the world. About a year ago Bell purchased
Aliant but so far the service for business customers remains solid, I
hope it lasts because we certainly know that Bell has a very poor
reputation when it comes to customer service, we found that out when
they purchased the Aliant wireless division about 2 or 3 years ago.
As for traffic shaping (throttling) they aren't the only ones to do it,
Rogers has also been engaging in these same shenanigans.
From: aa on 30 Oct 2009 03:29
"Sid Elbow" <here(a)there.com> wrote in message
news:0065db2d$0$12971$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > I'll second that ...
and a basic router isn't exactly expensive these
> days, especially from Craigslist (assuming you can find one amongst the
> Chinese spam/scam).
It's not just a cost, it is time to buy it, space on the desk and an exctra
electrical socket - I already have too many of these