DSL provider recommendation

[David Wolfskill]

>Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 03:35:19 -0700
>From: Herb Leong <herb at urusei.net>

>Well, if you went with SBC, you may^H^H^Hwill end up with IP problems.
>At the very least you will be given dynamic IP address assignments which
>sucks if you want to have a server of some sort.  And SBC frowns on
>servers.  The SBC offerings are aimed at the lowest common denominator
>which I think most of us on this list do not fit into...

With respect, some of the above may be true now with the use of
DHCP-assigned IP addresses.

But since I deployed my DSL connection (single static IP address), I've
run servers on it -- HTTP, SMTP, DNS, SSH -- with no hints from SBC (or
successor organizations) that I was doing something unwelcome or
inappropriate.  Nor do they do any filtering of which I am aware.

I *have* heard that Excite at Home and its successors in the IP-over-cable
industry have raised objections (as well as technical hurdles) to doing
what I sketched above.  This has not made IP-over-cable more attractive
for my intended use.

And since my IP assignment is static, I do not have "IP problems".  I
have had connectivity problems -- but then, I've also had 8-hr. power
outages (from the use of utility poles as braking devices for out-of-
control vehicles).  And my UPS presently only keeps things going for
about 45 minutes.

Peace,
david  (who would really like to set up a PV (solar) power-generation system)
-- 
David H. Wolfskill				david at catwhisker.org
Based on what I have seen to date, the use of Microsoft products is not
consistent with reliability.  I recommend FreeBSD for reliable systems.