<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is Skype a Bad Network Neighbor?</title>
	<link>http://voxilla.com/soapvox/2006/12/02/is-skype-bad-network-neighbor-102</link>
	<description>Voxilla's Commentary</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 21:54:18 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: jbond</title>
		<link>http://voxilla.com/soapvox/2006/12/02/is-skype-bad-network-neighbor-102#comment-54</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Dec 2006 09:23:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://voxilla.com/soapvox/2006/12/02/is-skype-bad-network-neighbor-102#comment-54</guid>
					<description>This is all FUD, isn't it?

- Skype shares bandwidth if a client become a supernode. But you can't become a supernode unless you have a full peer internet connection. Which means no firewall and no NAT. Which means no corporate PCs, because they'll all be behind a corporate firewall and NAT. So this whole story about Skype using corporate bandwidth without asking because of it's P2P roots is pure FUD, isn't it?

- That whole paragraph about Chinese hackers is idle speculation.  Now that can be entertaining, but it's not proof of anything.

- Then there's Firefox being a top security risk. Um, compared with what?

Perhaps you should ask who paid for all those reports from Gartner, and Bit9 and similar Skype scare stories from around the world. It's not exactly unknown for analysts to write a story that suits their primary customers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is all FUD, isn&#8217;t it?</p>
<p>- Skype shares bandwidth if a client become a supernode. But you can&#8217;t become a supernode unless you have a full peer internet connection. Which means no firewall and no NAT. Which means no corporate PCs, because they&#8217;ll all be behind a corporate firewall and NAT. So this whole story about Skype using corporate bandwidth without asking because of it&#8217;s P2P roots is pure FUD, isn&#8217;t it?</p>
<p>- That whole paragraph about Chinese hackers is idle speculation.  Now that can be entertaining, but it&#8217;s not proof of anything.</p>
<p>- Then there&#8217;s Firefox being a top security risk. Um, compared with what?</p>
<p>Perhaps you should ask who paid for all those reports from Gartner, and Bit9 and similar Skype scare stories from around the world. It&#8217;s not exactly unknown for analysts to write a story that suits their primary customers.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
