On Tuesday, 19 December 2017 16:39:50 GMT Wols Lists wrote: > On 19/12/17 13:57, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > There are no safe, free names to use for an internal network. On the one > > hand, RFC 8244 makes a decent argument that this is a good thing, > > because it guarantees that every hostname is globally unique (so if I > > copy/paste a URL to you, it goes the same place on your machine as it > > did mine). On the other hand, I hate the idea of paying some bureaucrat > > to be able to use my own network. > > Which was why I liked Demon as my ISP. They had a customer domain and > assigned you a name on it. Whether you used it as a host or domain name > was up to you. > > Most ISPs now assume you are a client and don't give you proper internet > :-(
Zen is fine too. I had to choose a subdomain (prh) in myzen.co.uk, then I could define 11 us...@prh.myzen.co.uk. I've only used a few of those, as any user names local to my LAN aren't supposed to be visible outside it. Any time I look round for a new ISP to change to for any reason, I'm only ever interested in those that act as a pair of bare wires connecting me and mine to the outside world - no interference,* no proxies, transparent or otherwise. Just a simple connection. I forget why I left Demon years ago. I wouldn't touch BT Internet with a barge-pole since they got all cosy with Yahoo, and UKFSN went more-or-less defunct. Whence Zen today. * [OT] What's the difference between intervention and interference? None that I can see. One is just more Politically Crass - oops! Correct - than the other. -- Regards, Peter.
