Boston Linux & Unix (BLU) Home | Calendar | Mail Lists | List Archives | Desktop SIG | Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings
Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU

BLU Discuss list archive


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

Could comcast be blocking port 6667 outbound?



> 
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: discuss-bounces at blu.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at blu.org] On Behalf Of
John Chambers
>Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 9:01 PM
>To: discuss at blu.org; BLU Discussion List
>Subject: Re: Could comcast be blocking port 6667 outbound?
>
>Bill Horne wrote:
>| Sorry to butt in, but I'm confused by the various "outbound" vs.
>| "inbound" labels on this topic.
>|
>| Let's agree on a standard definintion of "inbound" and "outbound", so 
>| we know what direction(s) we're discussing:
>|
>| 1. Inbound refers to traffic coming FROM comcast TOWARD my machine 2. 
>| Outbound refers to traffic going FROM my machine TOWARD comcast.
>|
>| Does that work for everyone?
>
>That's exactly how I use them.  I guess I'd assume that those are the usual
definitions.
>
It might be more useful or precise to say that outbound is a connection
initiated by your computer to that port on remote computer.  Inbound is a
connection initiated by an external computer to a specific port on your
computer.

Example:  If a POP3 connection is outbound, the "traffic" flows towards your
machine.  You initiated the connection, so it is outbound.  You sent out an
initiative connection to a remote computer's port 110.  I would say traffic
is needlessly ambiguous.

The direction is determined by the end at which the port is specified.  You
open specific ports at your end for inbound connections.  

MEG





BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities.

Valid HTML 4.01! Valid CSS!



Boston Linux & Unix / webmaster@blu.org