North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: who offers cheap (personal) 1U colo?
- From: Sean Donelan
- Date: Sat Mar 13 22:35:48 2004
On Sat, 14 Mar 2004, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > What you seem to actually be looking for is a connection with a fixed IP
> > address which doesn't share "address reputation" with others.
> no, i'm looking for a way to share address reputation amongst a group of
> serious-minded professional power-users who have learned over the years how
> to maintain their own BSD or Linux platform.
Ah, so its mostly a boutique mystic issue. I understand. I can't afford
Equinix's prices, so I have my personal server in a small colo outside
the California earthquake zone. Strictly an issue of money.
> > Why prevent people from running servers on DSL and cable modem
> > connections, yet say they could run an identical server in a colo?
> because most providers don't want to give out static ip addresses, for one
Most DSL and Cable modem providers will assign static IP address, just
not for the same price for the same product. You pay more, which turns
out to be very close to what you would pay for a static IP address in a
> > Why is one unsafe, and the other is considered Ok?
> this isn't a technical thing. it's all about people getting what they want.
Actually its about convincing block list operators that your IP address is
"Ok" to run a server. Some block list operators choose to list large
ranges of IP address, even if any particular address never did anything,
such as all APNIC address or anything they think (but not always is) a
"dialup" address. Because block list operators make mistakes, people
wanting to run servers are forced to find IP address ranges "far enough
away" not to be mistaken for a dialup address range.
If the block list operators think it is a "dialup" range, they
pre-emptively block all the addresses in the range. If the block list
operators think it is a "static" range, regardless if it is a server in a
colo or T1 line to your house, they usually don't pre-emptively block the
It has very little to do with the quality of the ISP's abuse desk. UUNET
is listed by Spamhaus as one of the worst ISPs for spam, but UUNET T1
address ranges aren't pre-emptively blocked. But large DSL or cable
address ranges, even if the addresses are statically assigned to specific
customers, are pre-emptively blocked.
I suppose ISPs could create boutique service provider subsidaries for
serious-minded professional power-users. Ask ARIN for independent "elite"
IP address ranges. Maybe even get a different 1-800 number for customer
service and abuse complaints. Of course, customers would pay more for
this "elite" service.