dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
57
ConstantineM
join:2011-09-02
San Jose, CA

ConstantineM to artem_2011

Member

to artem_2011

Static IP w/ U-verse vs. Dynamic IP w/ a VPN from a VPS

I highly doubt that PTRs with Dynamic IPs are on the table at AT&T, but if you purchase a Static IP package, they do offer custom PTR (I was told they would even do the delegation for a /27, for example).

However, recently, with proliferation of various VPS-style of things, it seems like it might as well be easier to simply have a tunnel to the real internet, and use your connection exclusively through the tunnel. Such a setup would go around having a Dynamic IP instead of a Static one, as well as going around having a crappy RG that doesn't let you use Static IP addresses the way you wish. It's likely to even be cheaper monthly-fee-wise nowadays, and you can even do all sorts of line bonding with such a setup, for example, seamlessly bonding Comcast and AT&T connections into one big pipe to the real internet, and have the combined throughput even on single TCP connections. If you're in a metropolitan area where the VPS part of your tunnel would be, then you might even get a within-1-or-2-ms latency with the bonding as you would be getting on the raw line, and might even get better routing and get rid of any kind of Netflix traffic shaping, too. Someone on this forum had excellent results with bonding two FiOS lines through a server at a nearby datacentre: »Bonding FIOS (A howto video)