🚀 go-pugleaf

Peter Chant <pete@petezilla.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <0d21f8.np1.ln@anacon.demon.co.uk>,
>	Mark Evans <mpe@anacon.demon.co.uk> writes:
>> 
>> Indeed it would probably only be useable with something like Demon's set
>> up. Where the only MX records point to the ISP's machines. There would
>> be less risk of confusion if the dymanic DNS and the MX machines are
>> sat on the same piece of ethernet.

>What are the advantages for an ISP in providing dynamic IP's? Does it 
>mean they give customers addresses from the private network address range
>and masquerade, or do they just allocate dynamically a small pool of IP
>numbers?

Most do the latter, the former is really annoying.
The main benefit is better use of IPs, with static IP, you need one
per customer.
With dynamic, it can be one per customer online.

Acquiring large blocks of static IP blocks can be hard these days AIUI.

-- 
http://inquisitor.i.am/    |  mailto:inquisitor@i.am |             Ian Stirling.
---------------------------+-------------------------+--------------------------
He who lives in a glass house should not invite he who is without sin.