OT: File Server at home
#141
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
>im currently running a half dozen websites, an IRC chat server, my own email
>server, and a file server out of my home on my qwest 1.5/896 DSL backbone.
>qwest has the most awesome TOS ive ever read so if theyre available in your
>area i highly recommend them. bottom line, they dont care _what_ you do with
>your bandwidth so long as you arent violating any laws.
I think as a rule DSL providers tend to care less about what you do with your
connection than cable, because you're not affecting other users in your
neighborhood with DSL.
--
Monte Castleman, <<Spamfilter in Use>>
Bloomington, MN <<to email, remove the "q" from address>>
>server, and a file server out of my home on my qwest 1.5/896 DSL backbone.
>qwest has the most awesome TOS ive ever read so if theyre available in your
>area i highly recommend them. bottom line, they dont care _what_ you do with
>your bandwidth so long as you arent violating any laws.
I think as a rule DSL providers tend to care less about what you do with your
connection than cable, because you're not affecting other users in your
neighborhood with DSL.
--
Monte Castleman, <<Spamfilter in Use>>
Bloomington, MN <<to email, remove the "q" from address>>
#142
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: File Server at home
You may want to avoid opening up raw ports to services. You may want to
consider using a VPN instead. This way you 'tunnel' into your network and then
have access to any of the services.
There are tools like poptop that will let you use a linux box to act as the PPTP
receiver. That way you can use any regular Windows client that understands the
PPTP VPN protocol to connect back to the house.
http://www.poptop.org/
-Bill Kearney
#143
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: File Server at home
You may want to avoid opening up raw ports to services. You may want to
consider using a VPN instead. This way you 'tunnel' into your network and then
have access to any of the services.
There are tools like poptop that will let you use a linux box to act as the PPTP
receiver. That way you can use any regular Windows client that understands the
PPTP VPN protocol to connect back to the house.
http://www.poptop.org/
-Bill Kearney
#144
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: File Server at home
You may want to avoid opening up raw ports to services. You may want to
consider using a VPN instead. This way you 'tunnel' into your network and then
have access to any of the services.
There are tools like poptop that will let you use a linux box to act as the PPTP
receiver. That way you can use any regular Windows client that understands the
PPTP VPN protocol to connect back to the house.
http://www.poptop.org/
-Bill Kearney
#145
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: File Server at home
You may want to avoid opening up raw ports to services. You may want to
consider using a VPN instead. This way you 'tunnel' into your network and then
have access to any of the services.
There are tools like poptop that will let you use a linux box to act as the PPTP
receiver. That way you can use any regular Windows client that understands the
PPTP VPN protocol to connect back to the house.
http://www.poptop.org/
-Bill Kearney
#146
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
>Subject: Re: OT: File Server at home
>From: Monte Castleman qmdcastleman@earthlink.net
>I think as a rule DSL providers tend to care less about what you do with your
>
>connection than cable, because you're not affecting other users in your
>neighborhood with DSL.
but with qwest you get almost 900k to play with. most DSL providers give you
128k up, and then sell you a 256k upgrade. i used to run my sites off a 400k
cable upstream on a dynamic IP and it was ok. they upgraded to 500k and that
was nice, but the 900k gives me more than i need so long as i distribute the
load of the videos.
>From: Monte Castleman qmdcastleman@earthlink.net
>I think as a rule DSL providers tend to care less about what you do with your
>
>connection than cable, because you're not affecting other users in your
>neighborhood with DSL.
but with qwest you get almost 900k to play with. most DSL providers give you
128k up, and then sell you a 256k upgrade. i used to run my sites off a 400k
cable upstream on a dynamic IP and it was ok. they upgraded to 500k and that
was nice, but the 900k gives me more than i need so long as i distribute the
load of the videos.
#147
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
>Subject: Re: OT: File Server at home
>From: Monte Castleman qmdcastleman@earthlink.net
>I think as a rule DSL providers tend to care less about what you do with your
>
>connection than cable, because you're not affecting other users in your
>neighborhood with DSL.
but with qwest you get almost 900k to play with. most DSL providers give you
128k up, and then sell you a 256k upgrade. i used to run my sites off a 400k
cable upstream on a dynamic IP and it was ok. they upgraded to 500k and that
was nice, but the 900k gives me more than i need so long as i distribute the
load of the videos.
>From: Monte Castleman qmdcastleman@earthlink.net
>I think as a rule DSL providers tend to care less about what you do with your
>
>connection than cable, because you're not affecting other users in your
>neighborhood with DSL.
but with qwest you get almost 900k to play with. most DSL providers give you
128k up, and then sell you a 256k upgrade. i used to run my sites off a 400k
cable upstream on a dynamic IP and it was ok. they upgraded to 500k and that
was nice, but the 900k gives me more than i need so long as i distribute the
load of the videos.
#148
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
>Subject: Re: OT: File Server at home
>From: Monte Castleman qmdcastleman@earthlink.net
>I think as a rule DSL providers tend to care less about what you do with your
>
>connection than cable, because you're not affecting other users in your
>neighborhood with DSL.
but with qwest you get almost 900k to play with. most DSL providers give you
128k up, and then sell you a 256k upgrade. i used to run my sites off a 400k
cable upstream on a dynamic IP and it was ok. they upgraded to 500k and that
was nice, but the 900k gives me more than i need so long as i distribute the
load of the videos.
>From: Monte Castleman qmdcastleman@earthlink.net
>I think as a rule DSL providers tend to care less about what you do with your
>
>connection than cable, because you're not affecting other users in your
>neighborhood with DSL.
but with qwest you get almost 900k to play with. most DSL providers give you
128k up, and then sell you a 256k upgrade. i used to run my sites off a 400k
cable upstream on a dynamic IP and it was ok. they upgraded to 500k and that
was nice, but the 900k gives me more than i need so long as i distribute the
load of the videos.
#149
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
>Subject: Re: OT: File Server at home
>From: Monte Castleman qmdcastleman@earthlink.net
>I think as a rule DSL providers tend to care less about what you do with your
>
>connection than cable, because you're not affecting other users in your
>neighborhood with DSL.
but with qwest you get almost 900k to play with. most DSL providers give you
128k up, and then sell you a 256k upgrade. i used to run my sites off a 400k
cable upstream on a dynamic IP and it was ok. they upgraded to 500k and that
was nice, but the 900k gives me more than i need so long as i distribute the
load of the videos.
>From: Monte Castleman qmdcastleman@earthlink.net
>I think as a rule DSL providers tend to care less about what you do with your
>
>connection than cable, because you're not affecting other users in your
>neighborhood with DSL.
but with qwest you get almost 900k to play with. most DSL providers give you
128k up, and then sell you a 256k upgrade. i used to run my sites off a 400k
cable upstream on a dynamic IP and it was ok. they upgraded to 500k and that
was nice, but the 900k gives me more than i need so long as i distribute the
load of the videos.
#150
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
MontanaJeeper proclaimed:
> if remote access is needed ive found nothing simpler to configure or use than
> VNC. see http://realvnc.com for more info.
We've used VNC, but the Microsoft remote desktop stuff is really easy
as long as you never need to have a local user on the server at the
same time as a remote client. Nothing beats Citrix.... or VMware.
> if remote access is needed ive found nothing simpler to configure or use than
> VNC. see http://realvnc.com for more info.
We've used VNC, but the Microsoft remote desktop stuff is really easy
as long as you never need to have a local user on the server at the
same time as a remote client. Nothing beats Citrix.... or VMware.