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

[Freedombox-discuss] ISPs, IP addresses. DNSes.......

Well ideally we'd have static, public IPs.
Even more ideally we'd have community mesh networking infrastructure
independent of ISPs.

But most of us don't have that, so I guess we're trying to work with what
we have today.

The reason why we're looking into PageKite is that this is a reliable
technical solution that gives you a static, public IP, no matter what your
Internet connection, router, etc. is like.
Of course with PageKite you're relying on an external party (unless you
host the PageKite frontend yourself).
Then there's the option of letting your friends host that PageKite frontend
for you, as is described on the

So like you're saying, the question is how bad is what level of compromise.
My personal opinion is that it's better to have more compromise than to
have a box that simply doesn't work for regular people.


On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Russell Edwards <russell at edwds.net> wrote:

> Hello, hope this goes through. (Haven't received any emails from this list
> for weeks,
> for reasons touched on below- yet the listserv swears i'm still
> subscribed.)
> Does the FreedomBox project have a position on what is a proper internet
> service? Does it include a static IP address, a dynamic email address or
> simply an internal IP address behind an ISP NAT?
> What are the privacy implications of the DNS network?
> Just a couple of questions as I come to grips with things. I set up my
> freedomishbox on an ADSL service with dynamic IP addresses. Then I switched
> to another ISP and was stuck with mobile broadband, with no external IP,
> for a  week or two before they switched on ADSL. And now I will have to pay
> $10pm extra if I want a static IP address.
> To me, no external IP = not a real internet service. People should be
> incited to reject what is really nothing more than a subscription broadcast
> content service. I wasn't actually aware that such
> a thing existed until I was forced to suffer through it.
> As for dynamic IP,,,,  is it reliable to found the FreedomBox concept on
> the idea that one should have to rely on an external agent to provide DNS
> services?   With static IP, at least you can host your own DNS, but as far
> as I understand this is not possible with dynamic IP addresses.
> Then again is relying on someone else's Dynamic DNS service any worse than
> relying someone else's internet service provision?
> Ultimately I guess we should be demanding a static IP and no snooping, but
> how bad is what level of compromise?
> Russe;ll
> ______________________________**_________________
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss at lists.**alioth.debian.org<Freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org>
> http://lists.alioth.debian.**org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**
> freedombox-discuss<http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20121017/c4964b51/attachment.html>

Reply to: