Re: Network concerns and configuration draft 4
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 23:57:28 -0400
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
> That's true. But at least around where I live, those ISPs that
> offer static IPs for a small surcharge are smaller, cheaper, and
> offer better service. Then again, those tend to not filter any
> ports even with dynamic IPs, so you wouldn't need a static IP with
> them.
>
> Those who charge a lot for static IPs (and/or reserve them for their
> "business" customers) tend to be much larger ISPs who don't care
> much about their residential customers (they rely on heavy
> marketing to lure them in, rather than on the quality of their
> service).
>
> To me disallowing running servers is pretty close to the issue of
> net-neutrality, so I prefer to stay away from such ISPs.
>
>
> Stefan
I have a large provider. I paid $100 up front for my static IPs
(/28), and no monthly fee. New customers don't get the deal.
--
Raquel
============================================================
When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when
it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it
so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil
power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.
--Benjamin Franklin
Reply to: