SCOUG-HELP Mailing List Archives

<< Previous Message << >> Next Message >>

Date:	Mon, 12 May 2003 08:05:19 PDT7
From:	"Info 4 SYNass" <Info@SYNass.NET >
Reply-To:	scoug-help@scoug.com
To:	scoug-help@scoug.com
Subject:	SCOUG-Help: Re: Static IP

Content Type: text/plain

=====================================================
If you are responding to someone asking for help who
may not be a member of this list, be sure to use the
REPLY TO ALL feature of your email program.
=====================================================

Hi =

About the same here:
I use a ZyXel Prestige 650R-I (over ISDN) and it also has PPoE.
Setup on the fly without any system modifications !
Regards, svobi

=

gary.wong@sbcglobal.net on 12.05.2003 06:06:40
Please respond to scoug-help@scoug.com
To: scoug-help@scoug.com
cc: =

Subject: SCOUG-Help: Re: Static IP

Jordan:

Since I have PacBell (SBC) DSL, and it has PPoE, I use a Linksys DSL
router to handle =

the PPoE part, so therefore I don't use InJoy.

On Sun, 11 May 2003 10:53:43 PDT7, J. R. Fox wrote:

>Harry Motin wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 6 May 2003 09:24:04 PDT7, J. R. Fox wrote:
>>
>> >to prevent) much easier. It may also be a superior quality of
service. I do
>> >recall that PPoE was considered quite kludgy, and a PITA for OS/2
users.
>> >There wasn't much support for it. I could well be wrong, but
that's how I
>> >remember it.
>>
>> I'm no expert here, but I think that there may not have been much
hardware and
>> software support for PPPoE. For example, I recently bought the Injoy
firewall. Their
>> latest version, the one I got, only now supports PPPoE.
>> HCM
>
>Yes, as best I can recall, PPPoE was for awhile Windoze supported
only, then, later, it
>was -- for US -- Injoy or nothing. I don't know whether or not that
is still the case.
>I can tell you that -- given a choice -- I would always pick a static
address over the
>DHCP variety, even if it meant paying a few bucks a month extra. I
couldn't recite for
>you the gory details, but I remember being told that one's
Home-Network-with-internet-
>connections-for-each-box options were clearly better with a Static IP.
Specifically,
>that
>you could set up certain things that the ISP would otherwise much
rather prevent, or
>charge you a lot extra for. (That may have more to do with running
Sites or servers
>from
>home -- I'm not sure. It's ultimately a bandwidth usage issue, I
believe.)
>
>Jordan

************************************************
>>> Say NO to HTML in Mail and News <<<
>>> AGAINST TERROR +++ AGAINST WAR <<<
************************************************=

=====================================================

To unsubscribe from this list, send an email message
to "steward@scoug.com". In the body of the message,
put the command "unsubscribe scoug-help".

For problems, contact the list owner at
"rollin@scoug.com".

=====================================================

Return to [ 12 | May | 2003 ]

SCOUG, Warp Expo West, and Warpfest are trademarks of the Southern California OS/2 User Group. OS/2, Workplace Shell, and IBM are registered trademarks of International Business Machines Corporation. All other trademarks remain the property of their respective owners.