On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Derek D. Martin wrote: >> Given that the service is advertised as having a dynamic address, that is >> hardly surprising. They are well within their rights to renumber you every >> time your DHCP lease expires. > > They may well be within their rights, but just because you CAN do > something, doesn't mean you should. If they want to renumber that > frequently, they should expire leases more often.
I was not aware that they were renumbering without expiring leases first. That is rather rude. (And would explain a few minor issues we've seen, that we thought were bugs in "pump" (Red Hat's DHCP client).) > This, apparently, is because their DHCP servers are overwhelmed. And > the old IP continues to work until someone else starts using it... So > I'm usually out during prime-time usage. It's quite annoying. Create a cron job which forces your DHCP client to renew your lease at least once a day. (Given your description, try once an hour.) This is what we did to solve the vanishing-lease problem. Crude, but effective. :-) > I don't mind being renumbered periodically, but given how disruptive it > is it should be a lot less frequent than it's been happening lately. I agree; it is reasonable to expect them to honor the DHCP leases they grant. Of course, what are you going to do if they shorten their lease period to six hours? :-) [RE: DSL] > Well, that may be true, but it can't hurt to look. Always true. >> We tell our customers: If your Internet is critical, then be willing to >> fork over the cash for a leased line. > > WHY? Because you do not see this crap with a leased line, and leased line providers are not going out of business every 60 days. Lead time to get a new high-speed Internet feed install is about 30 to 45 days, or longer, right now. For some of our clients, if they are off the 'net for that long, they face a serious risk of going out of business. At that price, DSL/cable is *far* more costly. It is not a technological problem so much as a political and economic one, but that does not make the problem any less real. > The technology exists to have it a lot cheaper than leased line prices But the infrastructure to actually deliver it does not, and Wall Street is no longer willing to fund the deployment of same. Just because something exists somewhere on Earth does not mean it is available to you or I. :-) > Why should we all be raped for something that should be as cheap and > commonplace as the telephones in your house? "should be"? Says who? I must have been absent when "cheap, fast, reliable Internet" was added to the list after "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". :-) >> When you buy residential Internet for $100 a month, you get what you >> pay for. > > I'm beginning to disagree. When I had 56k dial-up through earthlink, > it was more reliable than my service has been lately. And used significantly less resources (bandwidth, routers, servers, etc.). The reason cable Internet costs $60 a month instead of $1600 a month is they over-subscribe resources as if everyone was still a residential dial-up user. Would you be willing to pay ten times as much to make your cable Internet more reliable? > Considering this techology is permanently attached to your house, > providing good service just shouldn't be that hard, in my opinion. There is a great deal more involved to providing network service than stringing a wire between your house and the local CO/head-end. :-) > And this is ignoring such asinine service disruptions as > indiscriminately blocking ports... I am curious. Would you be willing to provide specifics? -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ********************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **********************************************************
