[conspire] Bay Area ISPs for servers/hosting: Re: (forw) Legacy DSL ending at Raw Bandwidth on 12/19/19 - please read carefully!

[jim]

     I still have Comcast business with
five static IPs and, at least when I
was using it as such, no blockage of
any ports whatsoever.
     I've abandoned putting servers on
it because they (three generations)
have gotten wiped. I do not know
enough of sys adm and also networking
to defend myself, so if I ever decide
to put up a web site, I'll use some
hosting service such as SquareSpace
that has a dedicate net ops team to
manage intrusions from without.

     You'll be discussing your ISP
research on Tuesday, November 19, at
Henry's Hunan at 110 Natoma near New
Montgomery?


On 11/14/19 9:55 PM, Michael Paoli wrote:
> Ah, yes, well, I've certainly started my research on options for ISPs,
> notably including hosting at home ...
> notably including DNS/mail/list server(s).
>
> And ... BALUG next Tu - I've come up with discussion topic ... topical
> at that.  I'll likely have website updated and announcements out (well)
> before noon tomorrow.  Essentially, something approximating:
> Bay Area ISPs for hosting at home / Democratization of The Internet
>
> Most notably, not only discussions of what options are out there,
> but the more general issue of most ISPs basically wanting to sell a
> "consumer" service - no static IPs - often not even an option for such,
> ports not only blocked by default, but some won't allow 'em period (e.g.
> TCP port 25).  (I've got unfettered IPv6 (tunneled over IPv4) ... but
> alas, not all SMTP TCP port 25 on 'da Internet has or also has IPv6 ...
> yet).
>
> Anyway, something approximating that for meeting topic (I've a wee bit 'o
> word crafting ahead of me ... notably for web page & announcements).
>
> And, as for my research on ISPs ... have started that fair bit, ...
> alas, I don't happen to also already have Comcast Business with static
> IP(s) to spare in the residence ... so don't have that path of least
> resistance option.  And yeah, for reasons, I'd prefer not Comcast, but 
> ...
>
> Anyway, haven't found an "ideal" solution yet.  Did come across one quite
> promising near-miss, though.  Don't know about general quality of the
> operation, but at least on the surface, LMi.net seemed highly promising,
> ... at least for my location in Berkeley.  Just one big issue that's
> probably a deal breaker though ... TCP port 25 ... no way to get that
> opened, as they resell from Sonic's service, and Sonic is (at least to
> them), hell no - not negotiable - on TCP port 25.  *Other* than that,
> seemed like it might'a made excellent fit (enough static IPs, reasonable
> cost, ample bandwidth, ... mostly unfettered Internet access, ... alas,
> notwithstanding TCP port 25).  Anyway, still workin' through what may be
> sufficiently viable (and hopefully doesn't suck too much ... like certain
> provider(s) I would prefer to avoid).  Anyway, more stuff to discuss
> at Tuesday's meeting.  :-)  "Of course" some "discussions" about such
> may also happen on-list(s) ... before and/or after meeting, etc.
>
> I still also, just for my own situation, have fair bit more research
> to do ... guesimating I'm only about 1/3 of the way to making decision.
> Most of 'em have lead times that aren't too horrific, so I don't want
> to decide too quickly and without sufficient information - and 
> potentially
> regret the decision.  Good ISP service, that that reasonably well covers
> my needs and interests ... and those using the services I provide too ...
> fairly important to get that "right" ... or, well, at least as close
> as feasible.
>
>> From: "Rick Moen" <rick at linuxmafia.com>
>> Subject: Re: [conspire] (forw) Legacy DSL ending at Raw Bandwidth on 
>> 12/19/19 - please read carefully!
>> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 18:08:42 -0800
>
>> Quoting Michael Paoli (Michael.Paoli at cal.berkeley.edu):
>>
>>> Sonic's fiber would generally be a decent choice, except the don't
>>> provide static IP addresses on it and have pretty much said they
>>> won't be.
>>
>> Sonic does offer static IP on Fusion DSL (ADSL2+ & VDSL2) service.
>>
>> Sonic does not offer static IP on Fusion IP Broadband or Fusion Gigabit
>> Fiber.  (They say, very vaguely, that the lack of static IP on those two
>> services might change in the future.)
>>
>>
>> Among the numerous reasons I distrust Sonic is that it requires (I
>> think?) particular makes/models of DSL 'modems'.  They supply one of
>> several models made by Pace.
>>
>> One of their support Web pages mentions that, yes, if you're one of
>> those privacy-sensitive control freaks who are not thrilled about Sonic
>> being able to control and spy on your entire uplink from _inside_ your
>> house, you can indeed switch your Pace device into Bridge mode, but that
>> this configuration 'is not recommended or supported', and that 'iif you
>> configure your Pace [model #] as a basic bridge, Sonic.net Support staff
>> may need you to reset your modem to its default state for
>> troubleshooting purposes'.
>>
>> I.e., 'If you don't let us have root on your router, gosh, I guess we
>> won't have total visibility into your end.'  Yes, guys, we know.  The
>> only point of contention is where you consider that a i bug, and I
>> consider it a feature.
>>
>>
>> Sonic's Fusion IP Broadband and Fusion Gigabit Fiber services both block
>> outbound connections to port 25 (SMTP).  Check out this mealy-mouthed
>> bullshit from their CEO about both the port-blocking and omission of
>> static IP availability:
>>
>>   Customer's Q:  Does anyone know if Sonic is planning to offer 
>> static IPs
>>   to gigabit fiber customers anytime soon ?
>>
>>   CEO Dane Jasper's A:  No, we are not.
>>
>>   Residential gigabit fiber service is not for business or hosting use,
>>   and the vast majority of consumer applications no longer require 
>> static
>>   IP addressing.
>>
>>   Using a dynamic IP configuration also allows for a simpler, scaleable
>>   network architecture and straightforward management, key as we 
>> continue
>>   our rapid fiber network roll-out. Less complexity also reduces errors,
>>    increasing uptime.
>>
>> That last paragraph in particular is such an insultingly absurd
>> smoke-screen, I almost turned on the kitchen ceiling fan out of habit.
>>
>> Anyway, it's obvious that Sonic is definitely not the sort of company I
>> like to deal with.  I'm tempted to say 'Oh, just FOAD, Sonic', but
>> that's a tiny bit unfair.  They're not actually notably awful, they're
>> just way, way overhyped by some overly credulous members of the local 
>> Linux
>> community who really ought to know better.  (I'm not naming names, here,
>> because I'm trying to be nice, but you wankers know who you are.)
>>
>> Of course, I'm not thrilled about Comcast, nor of course AT&T.  Relying
>> on an AT&T reseller would qualify as 'evil and incompetence mitigated by
>> outsiders who on a good day might be less so', i.e., uncomfortably tied
>> to AT&T IP-provisioning infrastructure in exactly the way that Raw
>> Bandwidth Communications DSL has averted.
>>
>>
>>> You can get static IP from Comcast Business, or from AT&T and their
>>> resellers.
>>
>> Chez Moen has three still-unassigned static IPv4 addresses on Cheryl's
>> Comcast Business uplink (/29 CIDR netblock), so accepting Cheryl's
>> gracious offer thereof is currently my path of least resistance -- for
>> now.
>>
>>> You might also check www.wavebroadband.com to see if they can reach
>>> you with their cable modem service.
>>
>> I've now asked for contact (from Wave Broadband), which doubtless means
>> dealing with some slavering salesdroid in a few days  -- or a canned
>> statement that I'm not in their service area.  (They have one of those
>> deals where they want a chance to assess you and guesstimate the weight
>> of your wallet before they're willing to give you any specific
>> information.  If you've ever dealt with Oracle Corp. or with most parts
>> of IBM, it's like that.)
>>
>> The availability map on this page suggests (if accurate) that they have
>> no service to West Menlo Park: https://broadbandnow.com/Wave-Broadband
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> conspire mailing list
> conspire at linuxmafia.com
> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/conspire

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/conspire/attachments/20191114/cba1cae1/attachment-0001.html>