I admit, I do not have the technical know how to prove it one way or
another, which is why I'm naming no names, for the time being.

However, now that I have been able to obtain a MAC code from these people
(they were amongs those who wouldn't until last month). Strange things
happened. It has stopped now, but as soon as I dared complain, and sign up
with a new provider, I was suddenly unable to connect with my frequently
used pages. All other pages loaded fine.There was nothing wrong with the
sites themselves, and I could connect to them fine on dial up, and briefly
got in ok through a proxy. My suspicion is that these people were
deliberately capping or blocking access to cause annoyance.Can anyone think
of a legitimate reason for these things happening?

I am actually quite worried, as I have signed up with my new provider, and
all seems well, but it is not activated yet, and the old isp might try to
prevent the process in some way. I am not contractually obliged to stay with
them.

Any comments?

Jennie

Check your Hosts file. Just search for hosts. One should be a text
file that you can open with Notepad.
There should be a local host entry, other entries than
localhost may relate to your problem.
It's always a good idea to backup system files before modifying
them, just copy and paste hosts into another folder.
Now you can delete any extra entries, then see if it all
comes good.
It's also a good idea to make the hosts file read only, to
prevent it being hijacked by the addition of rogue entries.
Once you have changed to your new ISP your old ISP
shouldn't be able to screw anything up.
A router that has a good, built in, hardware firewall, offers
a lot of protection, though some dodgy web sites can
still cause problems, as can dodgy programs.

On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 22:48:28 UTC, ato_zee@hotmail.com wrote:

Any program that can modify the hosts file is usually capable of
changing its read-only setting. False security.

--
[ 7'ism - a condition by which the sufferer experiences an inability
to give concise answers, express reasoned argument or opinion.
Usually accompanied by silly noises and gestures - incurable, early
euthanasia recommended. ]

The orijinal wrote:

That would be illegal.


Any more trouble and you should contact Ofcom.

You WON'T hurt yourself by naming them either. Name and shame I say.

Graham

In uk.telecom.broadband, on Mon, 24 Mar 2008 22:08:29, The orijinal
wrote:

AOL perchance?

They can do what they like, but I have evidenced that AOL have blocked
access to other ISPs sign-up pages. Very frustrating. Of course the
AOL user merely thinks the other ISP is pants for having duff websites.

Going via an open-access dial-up disproves this of course.

If my guess is correct, your major problem is going to be getting rid of
the infestation of the original software so un-helpfully provided by the
first ISP...

A decent new ISP (NewNet, IdNet, Zen etc) won't impose any restrictions
or their own 'branding' on anything.

--
Jim Crowther

Jim Crowther wrote:
I think you'll find it's the other way around and that some websites block
access from AOL's browser? Easily cured by switching to IE or some other
browser.

(kim)

ato_zee@hotmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the suggestion, and I have checked the hosts file - nothing
untoward. But unless I am mis-understanding something here, any rogue
entries would block access to the pages however I connected.

I use a host file manager and have a host file from a reputable source (MVPS
HOSTS file is a free download from:: http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/ )

Jennie.

In uk.telecom.broadband, on Tue, 25 Mar 2008 01:24:02, kim wrote:

No, I've never tried via the AOL browser. Any 'clients' I may have had
who were on AOL were weaned off the AOL portal very early on.

I used DNS checks via AOL's DNS and certain human-readable addresses
returned 'timed out' with no IP given. Use another DNS and you get the
IP address. Try that, you get a 404. Use another connection, no
problem.

Specifically, in three cases using AOL connections, I could access
NewNet's home-page - but their sign-up page just wouldn't work. Use a
dial-up, no problem.

I'm not fussed enough to raise any challenge to AOL, but now I know how
to demonstrate to their customers (when they query it) what a censored
goldfish bowl they have accepted before.

--
Jim Crowther

Eeyore wrote:
same

with menaces".

I have no problem with naming and shaming in general, and have done so
elsewhere. I just don't want to be landed with a libel suit over the
specific accusation that I am unable to sustantiate.

Jennie

Jim Crowther wrote:

where software is provided.

These people were decent once. I've been with 'em since dial -up days in
2001. They're still trading under their old name but have been taken over by
different people, and they are resorting to desperate measures to try and
make customers stay.

Jennie

But you may owe them money if you did not give the required notice.


Really? Are you suggesting the are threaten ing you with violence? More
likely they are asking for the amount you owe them.

If you cannot substantiate your accusations then don't make them. Don't
expect OFCOM toi investigate if you cannot do so.

Peter Crosland

g6jns@yahoo.co.uk

Peter Crosland wrote:

The ISP is NOT allowed to restrict their movement to another ISP any more
over that as a result of Ofcom's ruling on MAC abuse a while back.

Graham

"The orijinal" <hmakvvy02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message
news:fs9n8s$snu$3@news.albasani.net...
During the (thankfully short) period between the day I got my MAC code from
Pipex, and the day my new provider started up, my speeds were down to
<500kbs, my previous fault of dropout 1min out of five was suddenly
significantly worse, the news server was out most of the time and I couldn't
get any of my periforal wireless gear to get through, my Palm TX or my
internet radio. Worse than dialup, really, in spite of the fact that I was
still paying full wack for it!

I could be charitable and think they were still in the process of the
"maintenance" they had been blaming for the last 3 weeks, but there's a part
of me believes that they switched me over to some crap connection because I
was leaving. Am I being paranoic?

Barb

"Ivan Castan" <castan@hiddenaddy.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cfmhu3dr94vj9qj0nm1nidnp8uosd8926d@4ax.com...

Castan, ..... ;-)

Barb

Peter Crosland wrote:
I was rejecting their service on the grounds that their goods and services
were unfit for the purpose etc.

Don't be silly. My remarks were in quotes - ever heard of irony?

I promise you I do not owe these people any money. They can make spurious
demands which some poor souls have paid to get rid of them, but this
particular worm has turned.

being harrassed. I have asked OFCOM to investigate the matters that I can
substantiate.I simply wondered aloud whether there could be a valid
explaination for what had been happening, and Graham's response was to name
and shame. I am sorely tempted, but two wrongs don't make a right.

Anyhow, I have now succesfully signed up and connected with Plusnet. I am
happy with them so far, and they seem to be decent people.

Jennie

The orijinal wrote:
Fair comment Jennie. Sadly you are in the minority because many people think
they can just walk away with impunity and disregard their obligations
because they think the ISP is in the wrong. I do understand irony but the
term you used has a very specific legal meaning that is often used by people
who have no idea of what it is. You should be much better off with Plusnet.
They may not be perfect but they certainly try hard and do communicate.

Peter Crosland

g6jns@yahoo.co.uk

In article <fs98jt$trm$1@news.albasani.net>, hmakvvy02@sneakemail.com
says...
What the hell are you talking about?
--
Regards
Jon

The orijinal wrote:

Welcome aboard Jennie, give me a nudge if you have any problems.

Rgds,

--
|Bob Pullen Broadband Solutions for
|Support Home & Business @
|PlusNet plc. www.plus.net
+------ PlusNet - The smarter way to broadband ------