dsl and the confusedness the howto brings about various protocols

[Brent Harding]

I intend to use it as a full time connection when I get it. I'm likely to
get another machine to put just linux on to do that, and use it as a
gateway for the linux-windows combo, and my laptop. What happens if I tried
to maintain a full connection by pinging something every so many minutes so
things don't go inactive? Dialup, and it's disadvantages is something I've
been wanting to get rid of for awhile now. Static ip with dialup is kind of
in the middle, people know where you are, but you have the ability to
disconnect.
At 09:09 AM 9/10/00 -0500, you wrote:
>This is a new thing that ISPs have come up with in response to the media
>coverage of danger in a permenant connection. Because the media has been
>in a frenzy of the dangers involved in a full time connection, people who
>know nothing and are in relatively little danger have cryed for protection
>from the ISP.
>
>Some ISPs offer NAT to resolve this problem. For most people that is fine,
>but once again because of mass ignorance that wasn't a usable
>solution. You see people who know something and wanted to run servers
>pointed out that NAT has limitations (most of which don't effect the
>average user at all) and so ignorant people cried again. They didn't want
>the limitations of NAT, but they wanted protection.
>
>So some bright person came up with "new" technology. They decided they
>would use PPP over a standard ethernet connection and have the computer
>establish a connection when active using the internet. Then after a period
>of inactivity it would drop (or could be forced to drop when all internet
>apps closed like a dial-up connection). This "new" technology offered the
>speed and conveniance of DSL with the protection of dialup. The computer
>would no longer be a sitting duck on the net all the time and would again
>have a dynamic IP.
>
>Now for many what I am describing sounds very much like VPN technology. I
>personally don't know the details, but it sounds like it to me. Southwest
>Bell offers it in this area with their USB DSL modems. While some would
>say it is now hardware, I would point out that many VPN solutions exist in
>hardware. Now for the long and short of it as I can see:
>
>If the solution is in the hardware you shouldn't have any more trouble
>then a full time connection. I would look to see if it is supported by
>Windows NT and Macs. I doubt they would invest the time into software for
>both NT and a Mac. If it can be supported in Win 3.x it is most certainly
>able to work in Linux. But the ultimate way is to say no thanks and
>specify you want a static IP address with full time connection. If one
>provider doesn't offer that, call annother. Someone will sell you what you
>want if they can.
>
>-- 
>Kirk Wood
>Cpt.Kirk at 1tree.net
>------------------
>
>Seek simplicity -- and distrust it.
>		Alfred North Whitehead
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Speakup mailing list
>Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>