>> 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 business customers, which would significantly boost your cost.
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 dynamic IPs, so you wouldn't need a static IP with them.
Those who charge a lot for static IPs (and/or reserve them for their
"business" customers) tend to be much larger ISPs who don't care much
about their residential customers (they rely on heavy marketing to lure
them in, rather than on the quality of their service).
To me disallowing running servers is pretty close to the issue of
net-neutrality, so I prefer to stay away from such ISPs.
Stefan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
