Cousin Stanley wrote:
John Haggerty wrote:
I would ask would a static ip really be able
to allow the machines to reach the outer network?
Why not? As long as the outer fixed IP is routable
which it would be.
OTOH dyndns.org and others provide a way to tell
the outside world
OTOH dyndns.org and others provide a way to tell
the outside world what your current IP is. These
services are free for personal use.
I do most of what you are doing.
Paul
Are you using qwest dsl ?
Yes.
Paul
Thanks for the acknowledgement
I may try
Stefan writes:
To me disallowing running servers is pretty close to the issue of
net-neutrality, so I prefer to stay away from such ISPs.
It isn't usually the customer who is running a server: he doesn't know
what it is. It's the botnet herder who controls the machine that runs
the servers.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 07:15 -0500, John Hasler wrote:
Stefan writes:
To me disallowing running servers is pretty close to the issue of
net-neutrality, so I prefer to stay away from such ISPs.
It isn't usually the customer who is running a server: he doesn't know
what it is. It's the
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 23:57:28 -0400
Stefan Monnier monn...@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
John Haggerty wrote:
I would ask would a static ip really be able
to allow the machines to reach the outer network?
Why not? As long as the outer fixed IP is routable
which it would be.
OTOH dyndns.org and others provide a way to tell
the outside world what your current IP
To me disallowing running servers is pretty close to the issue of
net-neutrality, so I prefer to stay away from such ISPs.
It isn't usually the customer who is running a server: he doesn't know
what it is. It's the botnet herder who controls the machine that runs
the servers. As long as
I guess based on the feedback so far (which I think is good for a worse case
scenario) what I am wondering if replacing the switches with routers would
do anything about getting access to the system?
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Stefan Monnier monn...@iro.umontreal.cawrote:
To me
I checked the prices here
http://www.qwest.net/help/static_ips.html#howmuch
it seems that we are looking at the following
*# of IP Addresses**Monthly Rate**One Time Charge* 1 (1 useable)$5.95$25.00 8
(5 useable)$14.95$50.00 16 (13 useable)$29.95$75.00 32 (29 useable)$59.95
$150.00 64 (61
Stefan writes:
Do you really think that botnets can only run their servers on port 80?
I said nothing about port numbers.
In any case, in the quoted paragraph, I'm not talking about blocking
ports, but about contract clauses that say thou shalt not run a
server.
Which let an ISP block ports
I would ask would a static ip really be able to allow the machines to reach
the outer network?
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Cousin Stanley
cousinstan...@hotmail.comwrote:
Ok so here is the issue I have a desire to run my own linux server
as an rt box and to do wiki web serving plus
I run off of a qwest dsl setup that is feeding 4 computers
I would ask would a static ip really be able to allow
the machines to reach the outer network ?
John
In all honesty, I don't know as I haven't tried outside connections
through my qwest dsl with a static ip
John Haggerty wrote:
I would ask would a static ip really be able to allow the machines to
reach the outer network?
Why not? As long as the outer fixed IP is routable which it would be.
OTOH dyndns.org and others provide a way to tell the outside world what
your current IP is. These
Is there a particular brand of router?
Is the multi-tiered switch configuration preventing this?
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 6:27 AM, Paul Scott psl...@ultrasw.com wrote:
John Haggerty wrote:
I would ask would a static ip really be able to allow the machines to
reach the outer network?
Why
Ok so here is the issue I have a desire to run my own linux server as an rt
box and to do wiki web serving plus email.
This requires outside machines to be able to connect to your server on
port 80 by default. It's fairly common for ISPs to block port 80
specifically because they don't want
On 2009-07-30 21:43, Stefan Monnier wrote:
[snip]
Of course, a static IP would probably work as well, not by its nature
but because your ISP probably doesn't block port 80 for their static IPs
(since that would defeat the main purpose of having a static IP).
Some ISPs only have a small
Of course, a static IP would probably work as well, not by its nature
but because your ISP probably doesn't block port 80 for their static IPs
(since that would defeat the main purpose of having a static IP).
Some ISPs only have a small surcharge for static IPs, but others only offer
them to
Ok so here is the issue I have a desire to run my own linux server
as an rt box and to do wiki web serving plus email.
I run off of a qwest dsl setup that is feeding 4 computers that are
all getting internet
6. I am looking for the best option for the money I like cheap
and
Ok so here is the issue I have a desire to run my own linux server as an rt
box and to do wiki web serving plus email.
I run off of a qwest dsl setup that is feeding 4 computers that are all
getting internet in the following configuration
dsl non wireless model modem-switch-[a]windows xp
19 matches
Mail list logo
