e33187ce
From: grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se
On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 15:04:06 -0700 (PDT), David Schwartz
wrote:
> On Jul 2, 2:57 am, Yu Hong wrote:
>
>> So it seems, the vpn connection can bypass the gateway's tcp
>> connection restriction.
>
> No, it doesn't bypass anything. You are still limited to 20
> connections. One of those connections is to the VPN.
>
>> Am I right? And can anyone explain the reason?
>
> The reason is that the VPN is a single connection as for as your local
> network is concerned -- a connection to the VPN. However, what you are
> doing is abusing a technical implementation to get more than your fair
> share. It's equivalent to stealing because you found a blind spot in
> the store's security system.
>
> (This assumes the per-connection limit is not intended to specifically
> reduce the number of connection the local network has to handle, As
> your post suggests, it is specifically to control P2P usage. That you
> can get away with something by circumventing a technical restriction
> does not justify breaking the rule that restriction imperfectly
> enforces.)
To be fair, it works both ways. An organization can set up things like
the 20-connection limit, and *not* at the same time announce something
like:
"We do not allow you to waste our bandwidth on Bittorrent traffic;
it is unfair to other users. You may use it, but only if you
configure your client to rate-limit to N kBit/s".
If they do not explicitly say that, it is easy for a user to think of
the limit as something you are allowed to circumvent.
(By the way, 20 TCP connections seems to me to be so low that it hurts
normal non-p2p users. Not a good solution, IMHO.)
/Jorgen
--
// Jorgen Grahn O o .
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
