| 12:20 am on May 17, 2013 (gmt 0)|
"From Ethernet and Fiber to DSL & T1's, TrueNet "
How many common users are able to afford these types of connection speeds for their browsing?
Their primary advertings leans towards colo.
If it quacks and walks like a duck. . . .
CORETEL-TRUENET-BLK01 18.104.22.168 - 22.214.171.124
CORETEL-TRUENET-BLK02 126.96.36.199 - 188.8.131.52
TRUENET-ICIX-01 184.108.40.206 - 220.127.116.11
TRUENET-ICIX-02 18.104.22.168 - 22.214.171.124
TRUENET-ICIX-03 126.96.36.199 - 188.8.131.52
TRUENET 184.108.40.206 - 220.127.116.11
TRUENETIPV6 2604:8700:: - 2604:8700:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF
| 1:29 am on May 17, 2013 (gmt 0)|
The problem with these "jack-of-all-trade" companies is, eventually they will learn where their market is and focus their efforts there. What this will be in a couple years is anyone's guess. Of course, to some degree, this is true for almost any tech business.
| 2:02 am on May 17, 2013 (gmt 0)|
In addition to keyplyr's comment, many national providers are partnering with smaller local companies to offer mobile devices in their multi-service packages.
I've seen some of the larger US providers partnered with some companies west-of-the-Mississippi that I'd never even heard of. Whether these trends will last as the mobile market continues to grow or the conglomerates will purchase the smaller partners, is to be seen.
| 8:56 am on May 17, 2013 (gmt 0)|
Well gee, I know all that stuff as I used to run a mixed services company but our hosting and other services were distinct IP ranges, no mixed use at all.
I was wondering if anyone had any specifics on the TRUENET ranges as I'd hate to block humans by accident.
Maybe I should just drop them a note and see if they would be nice enough to respond and let me know which ranges are hosting only.
That would sure get the guesswork out of it.
Sending letter, feeling delusional, will let everyone know because if it's really this easy we should ask others as well because posting their IP ranges for all the bot blockers like us so we didn't block their customers or bother them would sure save everyone a lot of time.
So would simply putting "host-" on the reverse lookup for their IPs which they also didn't do.
| 3:29 pm on May 17, 2013 (gmt 0)|
|Sending letter, feeling delusional, will let everyone know because if it's really this easy we should ask others as well because posting their IP ranges for all the bot blockers like us so we didn't block their customers or bother them would sure save everyone a lot of time. |
Good luck with that Bill.
More than a decade ago, I was naive enough to believe that Service providers would actually enforce their user agreements.
A portion of most standard agreements says something to the effect of:
If your actions threatens or affects other customers on our service network, than your your service many be discontinued immediately.
I've some responses saved (both sent and received) from the early days. The cooperation of providers and detrimental effect of non-cooperation wasn't worth the time I spent to compose the contact.
There was/is a longtime members of this forum, however that believed firmly in contacting providers.
| 7:18 pm on May 17, 2013 (gmt 0)|
Don't seem to have any records for that ISP, which implies no problem.
Bill - I've seen several DNS lookups for DSL which have "host" in the response. I would not block on that alone. It would be useful if a suitable TXT comment was included in DNS records: an increasing number do but so many do not.
I also look very suspiciously at IP ranges with the email address as hotmail, gmail and similar.