Does anybody know whether NTL offer a static ip address, if requested?

I don't mind paying extra for it, but NTL tell me that they cannot do
this for me 'for technical reasons'.

(I have the 10meg consumer package).

Many thanks for any help.

Regards

Simon Clark
Business Telecoms

On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 16:09:33 -0700, simonclark123 wrote:

"yes", unfortunately.

They say it is dynamic BUT it wont change for months on end and
when you do what they say to force a change of IP number it just
wont change. Very strange.

"Janice" <Janice.Newmanxyz@xyz.com> wrote in message
news:egaglq$fhh$1@news.datemas.de...
It will change IP you attach a different MAC address to the modem
i.e. a different computer
--

Yddap

On 7 Oct 2006 16:09:33 -0700, in uk.telecom.broadband ,
simonclark123@hotmail.com wrote:

Not on residential connections, but you don't need one anyway. Just
get a dynamic IP to hostname map from someone like dyndns.org, and you
will get a DNS entry available to use from anywhere. You need to run a
client app on your PC to ensure the IP is up to date in DNS, but thats
trivial to do.
--
Mark McIntyre

On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 10:42:57 +0100, in uk.telecom.broadband , Janice
<Janice.Newmanxyz@xyz.com> wrote:

Not really, this is normal behaviour for DHCP. The MAC of your network
card is registered in the DHCP database and allocated an IP. So long
as that IP is availalbe you'll get it back each time you connect. It
will change is if NTL resegment their network (and therefore have to
flush the database) or if you connect a different network device.
--
Mark McIntyre

On 08 Oct 2006, Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@spamcop.net> wrote:

That may be the case with NTL/cable. I've certainly come across a
few ADSL services where the IP address is "sticky" (such was the case
with Freeserve in 2002 and 2003) but also come across other ISPs where
"dynamic" really is dynamic, as in getting a different IP every time a
router connects. Such is the case with Eclipse and PlusNet, to name
a couple of them, and was the case with Tiscali in 2004 (I didn't use
their service directly, it was bought in by another ISP I used). I
have yet to check the current situation regarding some other ISPs.

On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 10:40:28 +0000, Yddap wrote:

So I change the mac address and wait 4 hours (that seems the figure
most bandied about) with the modem unpowered?

On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 17:09:36 +0100, Mark McIntyre wrote:

If the advice isn't strange it most certainly is duff.

We'll see, I may try changing the mac address.

Mark McIntyre wrote:
It works very well too.

Why do you need a static IP anyway? IMO anything that depends on static
addressing is broken - IPs, even "static", will eventually have to
change at some point.

FWIW my own setup uses a dyndns address to cover over the dynamic IP;
and my own domain's DNS records point to the dyndns name. Fairly robust.

--
Please use the corrected version of the address below for replies.
Replies to the header address will be junked, as will mail from
various domains listed at www.scottsonline.org.uk
Mike Scott Harlow Essex England.(unet -a-t- scottsonline.org.uk)

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 15:03:34 GMT, Mike Scott
<usenet.11@spam.stopper.scottsonline.org.uk> wrote:

-Why do you need a static IP anyway? IMO anything that depends on static
-addressing is broken - IPs, even "static", will eventually have to
-change at some point.

If you want to setup a firewall rule to, say allow your home PC to connect to
your work one through NAT forwarding, but block everyone else, you would need a
static IP on your home connection. Firewall rules don't work with
words......which is a pain.


-Rob
robatwork at mail dot com

Rob S wrote:
Depends on your firewall. I stand by my comment.


--
Please use the corrected version of the address below for replies.
Replies to the header address will be junked, as will mail from
various domains listed at www.scottsonline.org.uk
Mike Scott Harlow Essex England.(unet -a-t- scottsonline.org.uk)

John Naismith wrote:
Or perhaps not.

I do, with a good success rate. But it's out of context and irrelevant
to my comment.

I do.

Likewise, I'm sure :-)


--
Please use the corrected version of the address below for replies.
Replies to the header address will be junked, as will mail from
various domains listed at www.scottsonline.org.uk
Mike Scott Harlow Essex England.(unet -a-t- scottsonline.org.uk)

On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 15:18:54 GMT, Mike Scott
<usenet.11@spam.stopper.scottsonline.org.uk> wrote:

-> If you want to setup a firewall rule to, say allow your home PC to connect to
-> your work one through NAT forwarding, but block everyone else, you would need
a
-> static IP on your home connection. Firewall rules don't work with
-> words......which is a pain.
->
-
-Depends on your firewall. I stand by my comment.


I'm not familiar with higher end kit - can some firewalls be set to block/allow
by dns name as well as IP address?

Come to think of it, can you port your IP from one ISP to another if you change
- I guess this is doubtful as they are issued blocks of addresses.....?

regards


-Rob
robatwork at mail dot com

Rob S wrote:
I use a freebsd box with pf as the filter. It's pretty flexible. I
doubt very much whether any of the smaller domestic router boxes would
give the same facility.

No, no and thrice no! Another very good reason for not having a system
reliant on fixed IPs.

--
Please use the corrected version of the address below for replies.
Replies to the header address will be junked, as will mail from
various domains listed at www.scottsonline.org.uk
Mike Scott Harlow Essex England.(unet -a-t- scottsonline.org.uk)