|
> Horst Herb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 2.) There is absolutely
no justifiable reason to charge extra for a static IP > number for an
"always on" connection - and honest good ISPs don't do that. In > fact, Dynamic IP
numbers are an anachronism from the dial-in era. I use this > as one of the criteria
to distinguish between reasonable and crappy > providers. I can think of a justifiable
reason. Number of customers ISP has
> number of IP address space ISP may have. Traditionally that has
always been the model ISPs work on, hence static IP=Premium. The package you describe as
having sounds like a ‘business’ package as opposed to ‘residential’. Those have been static for a
very long time (if not since inception). > The sole purpose of B4H
in my view was yet another means of stealthily shoving > taxpayers money in to
Telstra's bottomless throat in order to make it > financially more
attractive for the privatization 0_0 Jay P. Wulf Ph. 08-822 62969 Disclaimer: The opinions in this posting are just that,
opinions. My statements in no way ought to be understood to be the position of
my employer. |
_______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
