North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: who offers cheap (personal) 1U colo?
On Sat, 13 Mar 2004, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > So DOCSIS has a technical limitation which may or may not apply. This is > reasonable justification for limiting upstream bandwidth, not for specifying > that users can't run servers. If users can run servers effectively in the > limited available upstream bandwidth, then there is no _technical_ reason to > prevent them. I think people are being sloppy about saying no servers on certain types of networks. I think the actual requirement is for a long-term end-to-end identifier for systems, and maybe even network users, before they can do certain activities on the network so you can trace or block the system. Systems without long-term unique end-to-end identifiers would only be able to do a limited number of things because they are essentially fungible. Neither the location nor type of access media is important. A student in a college dorm room with an uncontrolled DHCP address may not be able to run a server, even though they have more than enough symetric Gig-ethernet bandwidth and you know what dorm it is physically located because all student servers look alike. On the other hand, a mobile server on a US Navy ship on a 1200 baud radio connection with a fixed address would be permitted to run a server even though you may have no idea where in the world the ship is physically located today because you could identify which server it was. (server clusters acting as a single system doesn't change this.) If you want to spend about $50/month for a static IP address for your DSL line, then the question becomes should you be able to send mail directly from your home server with a static IP address on a DSL line until abused? No need to buy another box, find a colo or figure out how to remotely administer another system or tunnel to it to send mail.