[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Sheflug] Public access services



* Stephen J. Turnbull (turnbull [at] sk.tsukuba.ac.jp) wrote:
> >>>>> "Richard" == Richard Lowe <richlowe [at] btinternet.com> writes:
> 
>     >> "Craig Andrews" <craig [at] fishbot.org.uk> wrote:
> 
>     >> > Purposeful retention of IP addresses not allocated as such to
>     >> > hi-speed customers
> 
>     Richard> of course, I could be wrong, but I can see no right
>     Richard> thinking reason why you wouldnt want people running sshd
>     Richard> and stuff like that.
> 
> I think they probably want the freedom to reallocate addresses and
> stuff like that.  They want to try to arrange that people "timeshare"
> IP addresses the way you "timeshare" a beach cottage.  They don't want
> people "camping" on their scarce address space.
> 
> As for ssh being "hardly high bandwidth", my primary use of ssh is for
> contacting various CVS servers!  I rarely actually type characters
> (outside of my LAN) through it.  You just don't know what kind of
> traffic is going through an ssh tunnel.
> 

I admit, that I also use ssh a lot with CVS servers, I use scp. or 
rsync -e ssh when I can.
But from the way it was described it was mainly intended as a secure way
to log in to a home machine from work / other places.

I can understand cable companies wanting to be able to change IPs
without inconveiniencing people. 
But it would seem far more logical to say that you could run apache /
sshd / whatever, but unless you'd paid for a static IP, there was no
guarantee your ip wouldnt change.

There are services like dyndns.org, and at a push, you could put
something in ip-up.local to upload a file with your IP in it, to
somewhere.


Not running any servers is more restrictive than it sounds.
if you're a windows user, you probably wouldnt anyway.

but as an example. I run a caching DNS server. its behind the firewall.
but it is server software....
I sometimes run apache to play with some cgi stuff. also behind the
firewall.

It just seems like a very inexact way of saying what they want.
no public servers, or capping your upstream, would seem to be a more
effective way of doing it.

-- 
|*-------------------=[ Richard Lowe ]=------------------*|
| richlowe [at] btinternet.com                   UIN: 74724348 |           
|*-------------------------------------------------------*|
| Europe has the Kilogram and the Meter.                  |
| America has the Pound and the Inch.                     |
| Childrens TV has the Elephant and the Double Decker Bus |
|*-------------------------------------------------------*|
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheffield Linux User's Group - http://www.sheflug.co.uk
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to
- <sheflug-request [at] vuw.ac.nz> - with the word 
 "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. 

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.