-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen J. Wilcox Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 5:02 AM To: Michel Py Cc: John Curran; nanog@merit.edu Subject: RE: Lazy network operators [...] Not being happy with the ISP's smarthost is not justification to run your own; you should change ISPs.. assuming we implement this locked [...]
That's a super idea. Now explain how that works when you have access to only a single broadband provider. If you already thought of this scenario, you're seriously underestimating the number of people in this situation. Reverting to 56k dialup to solve a mail relay problem on your only choice for 3MB/512k service doesn't exactly sound reasonable. Daryl G. Jurbala BMPC Network Operations Tel (NY): +1 917 477 0468 x235 Tel (MI): +1 616 608 0004 x235 Tel (UK): +44 208 792 6813 x235 Fax: +1 215 862 9880 INOC-DBA: 26412*DGJ PGP Key: http://www.introspect.net/pgp
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004, daryl@introspect.net wrote:
Not being happy with the ISP's smarthost is not justification to run your own; you should change ISPs.. assuming we implement this locked
That's a super idea. Now explain how that works when you have access to only a single broadband provider. If you already thought of this scenario, you're seriously underestimating the number of people in this situation.
In my example I suggested that there would be tiers of service, for an extra fee they would give you a service where you could run your smarthost. As already mentioned there are other ways to send mail than port 25 which is an alternative to you. My original point still stands tho, if your SP isnt delivering complain, if they're unable to deliver email then you wont be the only one with problems. Steve
Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
My original point still stands tho, if your SP isnt delivering complain, if they're unable to deliver email then you wont be the only one with problems.
Changing providers when problems arise is a viable option when; - Available services are more uniform - Email addresses are generally portable - Switching your local access provider happens in less than a business day or two And as has been previously stated, most people don´t have multiple options for local provider unless they want to dial up. Pete
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004, Petri Helenius wrote:
Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
My original point still stands tho, if your SP isnt delivering complain, if they're unable to deliver email then you wont be the only one with problems.
Changing providers when problems arise is a viable option when; - Available services are more uniform - Email addresses are generally portable - Switching your local access provider happens in less than a business day or two
And as has been previously stated, most people don´t have multiple options for local provider unless they want to dial up.
s/Email/Packets its the same, if its part of the service and its not working complain or switch Steve
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen J. Wilcox Sent: April 14, 2004 9:59 AM To: daryl@introspect.net Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: RE: Lazy network operators
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004, daryl@introspect.net wrote:
Not being happy with the ISP's smarthost is not justification to run your own; you should change ISPs.. assuming we implement this locked
That's a super idea. Now explain how that works when you have access to only a single broadband provider. If you already thought of this scenario, you're seriously underestimating the number of people in this situation.
In my example I suggested that there would be tiers of service, for an extra fee they would give you a service where you could run your smarthost.
I don't know how they do it in the UK, but in many North American places, the random large corporation providing high-speed residential/small-biz services don't WANT to offer tiered services. Oh, sure, they have a few tiers that differ on speed (and sometimes monthly bandwidth restrictions), but that's it, and that's all they want to do. These providers like providing the same thing to everybody (for example, if you get X POP3 accounts with your service, and you need X+1, they will NOT sell you an extra POP3 for $2/month or whatever), because it reduces cost, and they do NOT give a damn about the technologically-skilled user who wants to run their own small-scale $PROTOCOL server, etc. It's not a matter of "give us $Y and we'll do/let you do it", it's a "you can't do that. End of story." from their outsourced tech support guy. The "go elsewhere" argument against big impersonal ISPs that aren't able to match your needs isn't workable for many people, as was pointed out. For some people, the best solution is to buy IP connectivity from the big ISP, avoid using any of their other services (yes, I have fetchmail download mail from my POP3 at my ISP, but do I _use_ that account for anything? Obviously not), and do your own thing. If you advocate restricting this IP connectivity further, then you're screwing such people over, and possibly creating a big market for people on Mr. Vixie's list of colo providers... Vivien -- Vivien M. vivienm@dyndns.org Assistant System Administrator Dynamic Network Services, Inc. http://www.dyndns.org/
participants (4)
-
daryl＠introspect.net -
Petri Helenius -
Stephen J. Wilcox -
Vivien M.