On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:08:47 +0100, Ian bell ianbell@ukfsn.org was rumoured to have said:
Tim Green wrote:
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 14:06:21 +0100, Ian bell ianbell@ukfsn.org wrote:
Tim Green wrote:
On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 16:30:23 +0100, Ian bell ianbell@ukfsn.org wrote:
I am with ukfsn.org. No connection problems, no freebie wires only, excllent Linux support and they have just dropped their prices. Not to mention their direct financial support of GNU/Linux.
Hmm, they only seem to offer dynamic IP or a block of 8 (6 usable?)
Is that a problem?
I feel I only need 1 static IP address. Why would I need more for home use?
Tim.
Depends. I don't know why do you need a static address at all.
DNS and SMTP (both with better-connected backups in other networks) spring to mind.
On the more philosophical side, the idea that my machines should somehow not be fully capable internet peers unless I am making money out of it does not sit very well with me. Dynamic addresses and NAT are IMHO both ugly kludges that threaten to break the net's p2p, end-to-end architecture and turn it to yet another producer/consumer medium.
Ian
Rgds, /-sb.