4 ms·
[flagged]
by TZubiri 2y ago
[flagged]
- yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago>> ddns > Yeah don't do that if you want to be a professional with pride in their craft Why not?
- sampullman 2y agoWhat's a better option than DDNS that doesn't add a bunch of latency to every connection?
- TZubiri 2y agoStatic, dedicated ip address
- sampullman 2y agoSorry, I thought the context was an environment in which static IPs aren't an option. For example, my home internet provider offers them, but the connection is guaranteed to go down once a month for maintenance. So I think DDNS is strictly better in this situation.
- gsich 2y agoDDNS does not imply foreign domain.
- JamesSwift 2y agoDdns is absolutely the right answer in a lot of cases, and even better that a lot of routers have built-in support for managing the record for you.
- anonfordays 2y ago>>ddns >Yeah don't do that if you want to be a professional with pride in their craft Why? All of the large DNS providers have DDNS functionality. Even AWS has documented methods for DDNS on Route53.
- TZubiri 2y agoTaste
- anonfordays 2y agoWhat does that mean in context of DDNS? DDNS is the correct proposed solution.