My ISP is killing me!
Posted 15 January 2013 - 03:35 PM
Posted 15 January 2013 - 03:58 PM
I have not seen the private IP addressing used that way so it's an eye opener for sure. Sounds like they are short of real IP addresses (which should not be the case with the move to IP6).
Posted 15 January 2013 - 04:06 PM
Are you sure you are not in an area covered by the Verizon Wireless digital network?
I've had similar problems to those you describe and three years ago I found I had coverage into the Verizon 3G digital network and acquired the gear on a 2 year contract. It has worked great, very reliable and I'm very satisfied with it. This past year, May, 2012, Verizon upgraded the local wireless digital service to 4G and offered me new gear and a $10 a month drop in the fee if I'd make the switch to the new network. Either the 3G or the 4G network link device includes a WiFi router and I connect to it from any of my computers for internet access as well as linking between computers as well as a wireless printer...
For me the Verizon Wireless network has proven to be well worth the $49 a month contract...
If you have either the Verizon 3G or 4G network in your area, I'd suggest exploring it as an option...
PM me your location and I can look on the Verizon Wireless coverage map...
Posted 15 January 2013 - 07:59 PM
"A private network is a network that uses private IP address space, in the Internet addressing architecture, following the standards set by RFC 1918 and RFC 4193. These addresses are commonly used for home, office, and enterprise local area networks (LANs), when globally routable addresses are not mandatory, or are not available for the intended network applications. Under Internet Protocol IPv4, private IP address spaces were originally defined in an effort to delay IPv4 address exhaustion, but they are also a feature of the next generation Internet Protocol, IPv6.
These addresses are characterized as private because they are not globally delegated, meaning they are not allocated to any specific organization, and IP packets addressed by them cannot be transmitted onto the public Internet. Anyone may use these addresses without approval from a regional Internet registry (RIR). If such a private network needs to connect to the Internet, it must use either a network address translator (NAT) gateway, or a proxy server."
Your ISP is breaking the rules. Go get 'em...
Posted 15 January 2013 - 08:35 PM
Posted 15 January 2013 - 09:13 PM
I'm very happy with Verizon service, I have switched my home phone from a wired landline to a Verizon Wireless home connect device which will travel with me in my RV trailer and saves me considerable money with its nation wide service. Its basically the same type of service as a cell phone except that you use a house type phone plugged into a black box device with a small antenna on it and the service is a flat rate $19.95 a month regardless of where you are and where you call in the ConUS... I've been using the home connect wireless service for about a year and a half now, and the wireless digital service and find them to be better than landline/cable service where I am located. That and with Dish Network satellite TV in the RV and I take all my home connection services with me where ever I go except for electricity... And for that I have a 420 watt SOLAR system and 210 AH worth of batteries in the trailer.
Point is, I really like the Verizon wireless services, I keep a laptop connected for e-mail and business purposes full time in the trailer... I also have a Verizon Cell phone but rarely use it as I have a Panasonic DECT 6.0 cordless phone plugged into the home connect with a DECT 6.0 rangebooster on the wireless and the portable handset works anywhere i go in a 600 foot radius around the local area... Its an excellent setup and I have very good internet access.
Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:27 PM
Posted 15 January 2013 - 11:11 PM
What about HughesNet? - I know a guy who's wife works for the National Park service so he does his job from an RV. He is a computer programmer and connects to mainframes using VPN without any problems. She did tell me that he had to get their most expensive option to make it fast enough but I believe it was still only $100 a month.
Posted 16 January 2013 - 04:02 PM
Posted 16 January 2013 - 07:05 PM
Posted 16 January 2013 - 09:01 PM
Aside from cost, satellite historically has had really bad latency. For things like remoting into a server or observatory for real time control, long latency can be a killer.
And for the foreseeable future it will be. ~250ms to the bird and back in addition to normal latency. Anyone who likes online games would hate you for buying that service.
Sounds like you're either going to have to lawyer up or find a new provider. They don't seem too thrilled with VPNs. Were I a suspicious type (and I am) I'd suspect you're being penalized for moving large chunks of data that packet sniffing can't decode due to the VPN encryption.
edit: not being able to remote in to your own PC is broken, as far as I'm concerned.
Or they could just be incompetent, or out of addresses, or too cheap to have someone properly configure things. I like Ron's idea of a static IP, if the added cost is still comparable to any other options you may have.
Posted 16 January 2013 - 09:55 PM
Posted 17 January 2013 - 06:44 PM
Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:41 AM
Every service provider I've used in the past has provided me with a public IP. Seems to me this shouldn't even be legal on the ISP's end to treat their customers as if they are on a private LAN.
I've dealt with this _a few times_. One of my clients has a network spanning over a thousand locations, and we have connectivity from just about every provider out there across that network. As for getting public ip from the isp, it's getting more and more rare. On a thousand connections, less than half actually get public ip today, and as we roll out new locations, that number is going steadily down. As far as the legality goes, just read your terms of service, and see what they say. The only time it would be an issue, is if your terms of service specifically state, a public routeable ip is to be provided. I've NEVER seen that on the terms for a low end consumer type connection. When it is offered, usually comes with a significant premium on the monthly billing for a business account. There are some operations where it's not offered at all. It is perfectly acceptable for an isp to treat you as if you are connected to a private network, because you are connected to a private network, one owned and operated by the isp. Refer to the terms of service to determine just what that means, and, what kind of connection to the public networks you should expect from that. Today, for many operations, if web browsers and email work transparently from the 'inside', that's considered 'fully functional'.
The trend today with most isp locations, for providing IPV4, is to deliver the endpoint in the form of a router, to which you can connect as many gadgets as you wish, they will all get private internal ip. On the isp side of that router, it may or may not get public ip, and, as noted above, the number that do get public ip, is steadily declining.
We solved this problem by creating a rather large internal vpn. We have a dedicated server, on a high bandwidth public location, which handles a couple thousand vpn connection. The routers at the client end, are configured to create a vpn connection to our central location, and set up appropriate routing over the vpn for internal use. But there are a few caveats.
Forget about using PPTP or IPSec protocols, just to many locations that wont pass them correctly. Both may come 'in the box' on a windows system, but they are rather brain dead when it comes to transparent routing. If the upstream router connections dont have specific support in them, for passing special protocols transparently, they just dont work reliably. We long ago switched to other methods for vpn connections, to make that problem go away.
The root crux of the problem, ip space in the IPV4 range is pretty much used up, there just isn't any more to give out. Masquerading internal networks was the initial cure, and, another layer of masquerade at the isp level is rapidly becoming common / necessary. IPV6 is a theoretical solution to the problem, that isn't working out to well in the real world, for a lot of reasons. While most desktop type computing systems can be upgraded, out in the real world, there are millions and millions of dedicated devices like point of sale terminals, and various data logging devices, that are not IPV6 capable, and, not going to get that way any time soon.
The bottom line today is, IPV4 address space is used up. If you _require_ publicly routeable IPV4 addresses, prepare to pay up, and, in many cases, smaller isp operations just dont have any to hand out, so, switch isp or 'figure it out'. We were forced to 'figure it out' because a lot of our location have exactly one choice for isp, and that choice doesn't offer any form of public addressing.
Posted 18 January 2013 - 06:08 PM