The router is upstairs and needs to be so I don’t have to run wires behind walls so moving the router is out. I was thinking of extending the antenna via ( I think rg-174) out the window and around the house to the patio where I want the signal strength boosted. The run would be around 50 feet. I’ve talked to a colleague of mine who is big into ham radios (been doing it 50+ years) and he said running the coax that far would negate any signal strength you would get. Don’t know though. Would ohm cable do I need? Rg-174 is tiny and there are thicker coax cables used for wireless signals. (maybe a solid copper wire if I could find it in the right size) Also, I’ve heard you can setup a router as a repeater like the Linksys boosters work. Thought this would probably be the best option. If I have a Linksys ws54g then which router would work with it? Does anyone know? Which is the best option do you think?

You could pick up another WRT54G, install DD-WRT and use that as a repeater.

Or there’s the cheap (and fairly ghetto) way, which is to use a tinfoil parabola to direct the signal towards your patio.
Or just buy new antenna. Fuck the FCC/CRTC! Like they’ll ever notice. Oh, get your HAM operators license and it’s 100% legit, even if you boot others off their wifi

Getting it soon. Is it legal with a tech license or do you need a general/operators license. (operators license is a bit more than what I’m willing to commit too.)

Do you infer that extending the antenna is only legal if you have your ham license? If I do this what is the best way to go about it? *refers to the post above*

edit: Talked to a longtime friend who has been in Ham for over 30 years the other day and he said he’d give me a radio. Meant to pickup a tech book today but forgot.

The FCC isn’t going to give a shit about an antenna that lets you get WiFi on your patio. Hell, you can get bigger antennas for certain routers from Wal Mart.

Now if you buy an amplifier and giant antenna so you can blast WiFi to your entire neighborhood, they might start to look your way.
WRT54G + HyperWRT (bumped up radio power) + upsized antennas = wifi reception through three walls and across the yard about 80 feet to my garage.

What type of antennas and cabling did you use?

Also: Can you use HyperWRT with dd-wrt?

No cabling, just cheapie antennas I found on eBay. What do you mean by using HyperWRT "with" dd-wrt? As in a wireless bridge setup? The only wireless bridge I’ve ever set up was two WRT54G routers with OpenWRT, but I can’t see there being that much a difference between flavors…I could be way off base there, though.

Yea, I guess it’s called a ‘wirless bridge’. Would want my main router running dd-wrt and another router in repeater mode running HyperWRT.

Can’t find anywhere where anyone has done this yet and confirmed it’s ability. Haven’t searched real hard yet but will have to.

btw: if you don’t know what HyperWRT does it’s below. (for those cruzing through)

HyperWRT is a power boost firmware for the Linksys WRT54G and
 WRT54GS router. The goal of this project is to add a limited set of features
 to the last Linksys firmware, extending its possibilities but staying close to
 the official firmware.

HyperWRT is based on Linksys 3.03.6 firmware for the WRT54G and Linksys
 3.37.6 firmware for the WRT54GS.

HyperWRT has these added features :

    * Adjustable Transmit Power & Antenna Select
    * 13 Wireless Channels
    * 'Boot Wait' flash protection
    * Increased Port Forwarding & Triggering Fields
    * Increased Qos Device & Application Fields
    * Increased Access Restrictions Policies & Blocked Services Fields
    * Command Shell
    * Telnet Daemon
    * Startup & Firewall Scripts
    * Uptime
    * ...

Changes in HyperWRT 2.1b1 are :
- Updated codebase to 3.03.6 for WRT54G and 3.37.6 for WRT54GS 

Download for WRT54G:

Download for WRT54GS:

as some people said you can boost your antenna strength with custom firmwares or get special antennas. whatever you do i’d really try to avoid wireless repeaters as that could have a huge impact on your internet performance.

Didn’t know this.

"huge impact" ?

a repeater theoretically cuts your throughput by half (but really it’s not half). so with a G you’re send/receive to the router is 54 (but really it’s about 30) so half that is 27 (but really it’ll be about 15)…………… does your ISP let you download at 15meg?

if your ISP lets you hit 15meg for download then a repeater will throttle you. if they don’t then you won’t notice a difference.

Except that you don’t actually get 54 if you’re far enough away to need a repeater. The simple solution here is an antenna.

wireless has a lot more performance characteristics than bandwidth.

No related posts.

company got a weird email today from who they suspect is a competitor thats been trying to fuck us over for awhile. i dont really give a shit but they asked if there was a way to trace the email back to an IP or something. i have the header information but it was sent from a fake yahoo account. dont know if the header information kicks out the IP from the computer it was sent from, or just the yahoo servers it was sent from

here is the header info

   Return-Path: <kevorkdiaz@yahoo.com>
  Delivery-Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:08:23 -0400
  Received: from mxw02.daemonmail.net (mxw02.daemonmail.net [216.104.161.12])
              by mx.perfora.net (node=mxus1) with ESMTP (Nemesis)
              id 0MKoXI-1KFv8L3cRV-0004BA for ; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:08:23 -0400
  Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
              by mxw02.daemonmail.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AB41619F1F
              for <webdirector@bekelian.com>; Mon,  7 Jul 2008 11:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
  X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mxw02.daemonmail.net
  X-Spam-Score: -2.598
  X-Spam-Level:
  X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-20 required=10
              tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
  Received: from mxw02.daemonmail.net ([127.0.0.1])
              by localhost (mxw02.daemonmail.net.daemonmail.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
              with ESMTP id E6IU4-Ek+G1p for <webdirector@bekelian.com>;
              Mon,  7 Jul 2008 11:08:14 -0700 (PDT)
  Received: from n5a.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com (n5a.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com [76.13.13.68])
              by mxw02.daemonmail.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 03A2B619E23
              for <webdirector@bekelian.com>; Mon,  7 Jul 2008 11:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
  Received: from [76.13.13.26] by n5.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jul 2008 10:01:32 -0000
  Received: from [76.13.10.166] by t3.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jul 2008 18:08:09 -0000
  Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp107.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jul 2008 18:08:09 -0000
  X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
  X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:
  Received: (qmail 54238 invoked by uid 60001); 7 Jul 2008 18:08:08 -0000
  DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
    s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
    h=Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID;
    b=vorjaBJb6B2QcyDnAbn2M0sFUmq20Td9lGzjSjEVVAouPt4CS8lfMI4lNdbEvi2Puf+XwlNJArqwxvrc7rj3ceOHVH5TLBiD4zsmTpMSkBYToBiQSfPyJkfl5Cf8T2qGel38pz+HpJtyHFTHoPZdLqkJgaMC5PSguIc9Qx7l6Y8=;
  Received: from [24.251.157.171] by web59606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 11:08:08 PDT
  X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/1042.33 YahooMailWebService/0.7.199
  Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 11:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
  From: Kevork Diaz <kevorkdiaz@yahoo.com>
  Subject: Hello Abe
  To:
  MIME-Version: 1.0
  Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-515463560-1215454088=:52539"
  Message-ID: <754756.52539.qm@web59606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
  Envelope-To: 

whelp, did a few tests and compared headers. turns out this is the IP address for the computer it was coming from in case someone else has this problem in the future

Received: from [24.251.157.171] by web59606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 11:08:08 PDT

Wow, nice. So, from that are you able to see where it came from? Like, is it registered to a particular ISP or something? I wonder if you can do anything knowing where it came from.

i went to to get the location of where the IP is coming from. of the 2 possible people this email could have been sent from (the way the email address name is, its a narrow number of people) they both live on opposite sides of the city. got the approx location for the IP, so now we know who did it

lol, it says i live in beachwood. that is about a 40 minute drive from here. i would have thought that it would find the first hop station up the street instead…

i used another when i was at work (cant find the link) but it pinpointed his exact address. pulled it up on google maps and it matches the photos he showed us awhile ago of his house. my IP at work though shows me as being in North Dakota…no idea why though.

No related posts.

I use OpenDNS, Comodo Firewall pro, DD-WRT V24, and I have DSL broadband. For some reason the website will not load on any of my computers in any browser (IE7, Opera 9.5, FF3) I turned off the Firewall, hunted through my router for any setting it might be (I just reflashed it), I tried TOR and several proxies (in country and out), nothing works.

This is the error Privoxy returns:

No such domain

Your request for could not be fulfilled, because the domain name could not be resolved.
This is often a temporary failure, so you might just .

Is it something with the DNS? I’m confused. It is probably something stupid, I have a feeling I am going to make a fool of myself.
NVM, I just made an idiot of myself, it was the freaking DNS. I added the ISP’s servers to the OpenDNS list and now it works. I knew it should have been the DNS if it wasn’t resolving.
And for future reference we do not help with illegal activites

No related posts.

Work computer – it loads
Phone – it loads
Other people – it loads
My laptop – ‘Internet Explorer cannot display this webpage.’ Won’t load in FireFox either.

Reset my router. Cleared history, temp files, cookies. Restarted multiple times.

It still doesn’t work. Any idea why?

any firewall or internet security installed? it could be blocking it.

Can you try another machine on the same internet connection?
Try going to it by IP, instead of name. See if it goes through.

No

I just noticed today that the status bar at the bottom of the screen says something along the lines of ‘dnsstatus’. It’s just a blip when I refresh the page, so I can’t read it all.

It should be said, that I didn’t build the site (had a guy do it for me) and I’m pretty dumb when it comes to things like this.

What’s a lookup?

Yep. Still doesn’t work.

Edit – Found it:

72.167.131.9

Still doesn’t work.
I remember a post on one of my Jeep BB’s where someone who had Comcast cable wasn’t able to access a specific site. He put up a poll and most of the local Comcast users couldn’t access it either. I’m not sure if he got it resolved or not.

I would say to try and call your ISP, but good luck with that.

that happened to me once with comcast, couldn’t access google. contacted comcast and they said it was a problem on their (comcast’s) end.

No related posts.

Im having the same issue lately with my ATT DSL. but i have a 2wire modem. Its not hot, and it pings fine. I think its the ISP.
My AT&T DSL used to do that all the time with a Westell modem and Linksys router. It always came back on its ow though.

Haven’t noticed it lately.
Might want to try a new router? My gf had a lot of problems with her DSL connection and I could not figure out what was wrong with it. I just bought her a new router and it fixed the problem.

No related posts.

So, I’m working for an organization part-time…and we have recently been getting help desk calls about e-mails being bounced back, and being classified as undeliverable. There was recently a large amount of spam being sent from our domain, and I believe this has caused our domain to become blacklisted on places like Hotmail, Yahoo, Comcast, etc…etc. There are probably 10 or 15 different e-mail providers that are bouncing our messages back.

Our Sys Admin should be doing something about this, but he recently just quit…so our server guys have been overloaded with work (Trying to push out AD)

I was just wondering if there is something that can be done about this, rather than having to contact every provider individually to try and get them to unblock us…because we are a legit institution!
verify your MX is OK (domain trail in headers resolves and matches domain in "From:")
Check with blocking services and ask them to re-review your domain

blocking services, as in, spam filters?

You will have to excuse my ignorance in this subject matter..
Our company had the same problem. You (or someone) will have to call those ISPs and request to be removed from their blacklists.
Get yourself a PTR record in your DNS setup while you’re at it.

shitty story
I ran a test from mxtoolbox and found that our domain is not blacklisted by any global blacklists.

Looks like just ISP blacklists.

No related posts.

Almost a year ago we first reported that Comcast was actively disconnecting BitTorrent seeds. Now, after numerous debates and false promises from Comcast, the FCC has ruled that Comcast’s BitTorrent interference is unacceptable, and orders the company to stop doing so.

Kevin Martin, FCC chairman told AP that Comcast’s BitTorrent throttling is “arbitrary”, and that the company had violated the principles of the Federal Communications Commission. Martin said that Comcast slows down BitTorrent users independent of the amount of traffic they use, and that the company failed to communicate their network management practices to their consumers.

Indeed, a recent study by the Max Planck Institute showed that the company had misinformed the FCC and their users. Comcast has always argued that BitTorrent upstream traffic was only blocked during periods of heavy network traffic, this turns out to be a lie, as the study showed that they blocked BitTorrent upstream traffic 24/7.

The FCC has announced that it will take appropriate action against Comcast, and the ISP will be ordered to stop interfering with BitTorrent traffic. Comcast has said before that it will invest in its network capacity and stop slowing down the traffic of their users, but these were all false promises.

Marvin Ammori, general counsel of Free Press who filed the complaint with the FCC is delighted with this outcome, and said in a response: “Nine months ago, Comcast was exposed for blocking free choice on the Internet. At every turn, Comcast has denied blocking, lied to the public and tried to avoid being held accountable. We have presented an open and shut case that Comcast broke the law.”

“The FCC now appears ready to take action on behalf of consumers. This is an historic test for whether the law will protect the open Internet. If the commission decisively rules against Comcast, it will be a remarkable victory for organized people over organized money,” Ammori added.

It is to be expected that – if the pipes are really congested – Comcast and other ISPs will have to step away from the all-you-can-eat plans they have been offering for years, now that people are actually using bandwidth they signed up for.
Hot damn, now I don’t have to be worried when I move and Comcast is the only ISP available in the area.

i wouldn’t be so quick to say that. if you are really using bittorrent and have high bandwidth requirements, you’re probably going to be paying more for your internet access.

honestly, i don’t know why they just haven’t done this for years. if 90% of the bandwidth is being used by 5% of the users, make them pay more for the extra bandwidth and then use that money to increase the available bandwidth.
My ass the pipes are clogged. There’s more dark fiber in the USA than lit fiber.
I prefer a socialist internet. I pay the same as everyone else, and use it as I need to. I don’t want to have to pay more one month, less the next month, just because I had more Windows updates than normal.
in other news

cliffs: the RIAA can diaf

well, no. i’m figuring there would be a bandwidth cap, though i guess there could be a monthly usage cap too. pay X for 250down/150 up… Y for 500down/250up. Z for 1Mb down/500kbup. you know. instead of throttling speeds, force people to pay for the speed they want.

that’s the way it should work. fuck all you can eat because if there is an asshole that is running BitTorrent on my shared cable line and is fucking up my connection, then he should be paying more to pay for upgrades so my service isn’t degraded.

Start a movement, I’ll join.

No need. It’s already that way. They’re trying to change it to not be that way anymore.

If there’s a bandwidth cap, there is by definition a usage cap. If you can’t download more than 1Mb/s, then you can’t download more than 2.5Tb/mo. The problem isn’t the asshole next door running BitTorrent, the problem is the assholes at the cable company who sell your neighbors more than their fair share of the cable’s maximum capacity.

i agree that the cable company is full of assholes, but i hate when people run their torrent client 24/7 knowing that they are on a shared link and not caring that they are fucking up everyone else’s connectivity.

oh, and a bandwidth cap only constitutes a usage cap if you are maxing your connection non-stop. if you are, you shouldn’t be paying the same as me. it doesn’t matter the size of the pipe, the assholes i’m talking about will max it out no matter what the limit is simply because they can. so, have them pay twice as much as me and use that to fund a bigger pipe.

over-selling is essentially a REQUIREMENT in order to provide the burstable speeds that we demand for a price we’re willing to pay.

There’s a reason that business products cost more for the same bandwidth — because the business statistically use it more fully than their residential counter-parts.

Look at webhosting…. Dreamhost gives me 8,656 GB of bandwidth per month…. but if I even came close to using that they’d shut me down. It’s all smoke and mirrors to make you feel good.

If people would just stop being asshats and stop with the piracy then everything would be better for everyone. Costs would go down, and speeds would go up.

Torrents are not inherently bad, but if you remove piracy from torrent usage it basically goes the way of gopher.

No related posts.

So, no matter what port I try to set for uTorrent, it will not let me and gives me that error. Any idea what the fuck I’m doing wrong here? I have a netgear wireless router.

How and where are you trying to set up the port forwarding. More information please. If the name is the problem, try calling it torrent2 or something.
In my wireless router settings.

I’ve tried 800 combinations of names/ports, they all give the same error.

Whatever info you guys need I can try and post
Not sure about your DSL modem, but mine came preconfigured in "routing" mode…so the modem itself serves as a router/firewall and DHCP server…overkill if you’re using an external router already. See if there’s an option to swap the modem to bridge mode.

That’s actually just what a friend told me as-well after I told her that my IP that is shown in my wireless router settings is different than the static IP I was assigned by my internet service. Only problem is, I have no idea how to swap my modem to bridge mode, cliffs?
The modem is a ComTrend CT-5621 if that helps any.

edit: Just got off live help with my provider and this is what they told me:

dsl support : If you have a static IP from us, then the modem isn’t in any router mode (some modems are, some aren’t so that’s why I wasn’t sure at first.) You would simply need to set the computer to use DHCP and set the static IP in the router.
if you dont have tons of stuff setup on the router do a software reset on it and try to forward then. what router is it?
Netgear WGR614 v6

I’ve tried the software reset before, same bullshit problems. Now I’m hard-wired into my modem on my other laptop trying to access my modem IP and it’s telling me wrong un/pw on it. Tried admin/admin admin/pass admin/password and my login un/pw, nothing.
ah yes the netgear. i used to have the same problem with those. youd type something in for port forwarding and it wouldnt show up on the list but if you tried to enter it again it would give you a naming error. complete garbage, id get a linksys wrt54g which should fix your problems. i dont think getting into your modem is going to be fix anything if they already said its bridged. also on portforwarding.com they have admin/admin as the user/pass for the comtrend so if its not the isp must have something special in there.

No related posts.

On that note…here is a smokeping for my DSL connection:

Anything I can do besides killing all of my neighbors? It’s obvious the horrendous latency problem only appears during the peak evening time frame.

heh… I just upgraded from the basic dsl service to the 3.0mb service. I was getting 1.2mb at most. Opened a trouble ticket. They had me remove the line filter to my modem and it bumped to 1.6mb. Since they advertise (in the small print) 1.5 to 3.0mb as part of this plan they closed the ticket and said in reality anyone on the 3.0mb plan would get 2.2mb at most.

Meh.. better than the 768kbps I had before.
The basic design of phone networks requires that there is a dedicated line all the way to whatever is the modern equivalent of the switchboard, and that the main line has enough bandwidth to carry ALL of the service lines at full quality.

Cable, on the other hand, is a multicast system, where the same content gets piped to everyone all at once, so there’s no need for dedicated bandwidth to each customer.

So yeah, you don’t have your own personal dedicated connection to every other computer on the internet, but there has to be enough bandwidth to carry all of those connections at full speed, or else they wouldn’t also be able to carry high-quality voice calls to/from all the customers either.
It is dedicated, but that doesn’t mean that your ISP can handle all of the traffic on its network. Looks like the network is being overloaded at peak time and its not necessarily your neighbours.

Tell your ISP to buy more bandwidth and upgrade its network … not likely to happen.
deusexaethera obviously doesn’t know what multicast means, because it certainly doesn’t apply here.

Also DSL oversells just the same as cable does. Due to the nature of DSL, however, load is split across an entire DSLAM as where cable is split up into nodes. Telcos can shuffle customers around to different DSLAMS with a simple twisted pair and a punch tool…. but cable cos cannot reasonable shuffle around nodes without laying down more fibre. It’s not uncommon for some cable nodes to be under-utilized and other nodes to be over-utilized… So some neighborhoods will experience good speeds and other neighborhoods may be starved for bandwidth at peak times.

In my area about a year ago, I was lucky to get 400Kbit/sec on cable (and I mean *LUCKY*)… but after re-doing their HFC I now get 8MBit/sec during peaks and 13MBit/sec off-peak (I pay for 16Mbit/sec service).

DSL, on the other hand, has proven to be extremely *consistent* for me. Not quite as fast as what cable currently offers me, but I still do have a Qwest DSL line as a backup, and it is very reliable.

Overall, EVERY residential ISP is going to be over-sold. If they’re not, then the company will not be profitable, and will go under. That being said, when designed properly, it works 99% of the time.

I had the same issue with DSL in two different regions, where I consistently received the lowest guaranteed speed in the contract. Pays to read the fine print. I’ve been with cable for three years now and consistently have the max advertised speed. I’m afraid to move.

Note the little diagrams on the right side of the page. I think I hit it spot-on. Content is broadcast to neighborhood hubs, and then it’s multicast to subscribing customers.

Semantics aside, the point is that cable didn’t have to have enough bandwidth on main lines to supply full bandwidth to all service lines at all times, because back when it was only used for TV, most of the content was redundant from house to house, whereas phone service has always required full bandwidth to each customer. So DSL is still the better deal, on account of the underlying technology.

not really, multicast isnt a topology but the idea of sending the same data to multiple ends at the same time… if they were multicasted and 5 customers were watching the same streaming webcast it would only pipe it once and everyone would pick it up

IBYouDidntUseTheRightTerms
Broadcast and multicast both transmit data a single time and then it gets replicated at each hub where there are multiple recipients, but broadcast is received by everyone in range, whereas multicast is received only by those people who want to receive it. Such as, people who pay for HBO and Cinemax.

In other words, yes I did use the right terms.

ahh yes i forgot we were talking about cable as well, as in cable tv… because it does apply in that situation… carry on

Yeah, I was doing a comparison, since the OP was doubting whether there was any benefit to DSL. Phone service is unicast, or at least it’s a lot closer to being unicast than cable is.
this isn’t about pots or tv…… this is about dsl and cable data.

Yes, data is what it’s about. But that data is transmitted across the same infrastructure as phone service and TV service, hence the layout of that infrastructure is relevant to the conversation. Phone systems have to support all customers at full bandwidth all the time (at least up to the regional backbones), and cable doesn’t. Which is why DSL’s data throughput is more reliable than cable’s.

If the ISP doesn’t have the bandwidth it still won’t make any difference.

um, no, actually it doesn’t go over the same infastructure…. It’s the same network for the "last mile" but once it gets to the CO then it’s diff.

telcos, for example, generally use IP networks (and some legacy ATM) for their data backhaul (packet-switched) but they use SS7 switched networks for voice. Completely different.

No related posts.

anybody know of the best deals on dsl or cable?

i am thinking that dsl is the only option in the business complex because there are no cable inputs anywhere.

any help is appreciated. thanks
depends on your area. Cable co’s will often offer fibre if you want 5mbit/sec or more (just an approx).
yeah….basically all we need is just the cheapest internet that will go as fast as a home dsl or cable connection. we are not running any servers or anything.

All we have is one computer hooked directly to it. Nothing special.

then call your local telco and cable co and ask for a quote. Basic dsl/cable lines are easy for them to quote. Depending on where your office is, the building may already have a POP and they can run a drop fairly easily and install a jack. However, if they don’t have a POP then they may not be an option.

either way, no one in this forum can help you. Pick up your phone and call them.

yeah…i did that. I am waiting on a response. I figured that I would jump on OT and ask here. I called cox (cable co out here) and qwest (dsl), and qwest does not offer service in the area and I am waiting on a response from cox.

either way, I was just wondering your opinions but it sounds like a specific question that can’t be answered generically.
cox is a no go in our building. qwest did not have anything either. phoenix people….any ideas?
have you talked to building management? They should know options. You may have to go fractional T1 (spendy).

I don’t talk to building management since I do not own the business, yet, . I might end up going to the other stores and asking what they use for a quick solution to this issue.

how much bandwidth do you need? Are you going to be hosting anything, or just local internet browsing? T1 prices are getting really cheap out here, but I worry that if qwest can’t give you service that you might be in an area that is bad for copper.

You could also look into microwave based internet service. I don’t know anything about this company, but it’s the first one i found on google:

What area are you in?
this is in the ahwatukee area. the internet needs to be nothing special. no hosting, no network, nothing except for accessing websites and doing registration forms online.
How many people are going to be using the net?

How about a wireless card from Verizon, Sprint, etc…. It will probably run you $60-$70/month unlimited. I’ve also seen routers that you can plug the PC cards into to share the connection.
yeah that phoenix internet thing is $85 month for 512 download……no thanks. I will look around for some smaller providers out here though.

I had thought about doing the wireless card thing. We are only running one computer right now, possibly 2-3 in the future. There is no excessive need for speed or bandwidth.

I’m not sure what we were looking to spend, but probably the cheapest that offers relatively fast internet that can download files and upload a small webpage.

No related posts.