[126147] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: any "bring your own bandwidth" IPv4 over IPv4 tunnel merchants?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brandon Galbraith)
Mon May 3 14:17:51 2010
In-Reply-To: <i2n2d6a9f6f1005031112se8de3e52x111c7dcdf5ba7042@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 13:17:26 -0500
From: Brandon Galbraith <brandon.galbraith@gmail.com>
To: Bill Bogstad <bogstad@pobox.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
http://www.google.com/search?q=vpn+service
Encryption would be a side benefit for your purpose.
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Bill Bogstad <bogstad@pobox.com> wrote:
> Like many people, I can't justify the expense of "commercial" IP
> connectivity for my residence. As a result, I deal with dynamic IP
> addresses; dns issues; and limitations on the services that I can host
> at my residence. It just struck me that in the same way that
> IPv6 connectivity can be done via tunneling over IPv4 (Hurricane
> Electric, etc.), that static IPv4 addressability could be offered in a
> similar fashion.
>
> Some my question is:
>
> Does anyone offer (probably bandwidth restricted) IPv4 over IPv4
> tunneling (with static IPs) commercially?
>
> I realize that making use of such a service MIGHT violate Terms of
> Service agreements, but that is going to vary from provider to
> provider and doesn't make offering such a service inherently wrong.
> Other possible reasons such services might be desired include wanting
> access to Internet services which are regionally restricted. (Again
> TOS violation possibilities MAY or MAY NOT apply.)
>
> In the (very?) long term, IPv4 over IPv6 tunneling could end up being
> one way that organizations can get IPv4 connectivity when the default
> changes from only-IPv4 to only-IPv6. (Yeah, I know that day may never
> come...)
>
> Thanks,
> Bill Bogstad
>
>
--
Brandon Galbraith
Voice: 630.492.0464
