I remember reading that the requirements for obtaining a ranked server include having a static IP. Is having a dynamic IP completely out of the question? What if TWI are provided with a constantly updating DYNDNS URL? (A URL that can be always used to find the server IP, even if it changes)?
[Question] Getting a server ranked - Dynamic IP
- Thread starter Malteserr
- Start date
Why does your server have a dynamic IP? If you are hosting the server on a home connection/computer, nobody will want to play on it anyways.
Why are you so sure? I happen to have one of the best connections in my country and my server will cater for local players. The only issue is that I have a dynamic IP and a static one will cost me almost twice as much which is pretty stupid.
I'm asking for the possibility of having a ranked server using a dynamic IP, I'm not asking for your smart comments. Thanks.
What is your connection speed?
And it is unlikely that your ISP will let you host a server according to their EULA, and could be subject to termination.
![[TW]schneidzekk](/data/avatars/s/0/1.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
try to get your ISP to sell you a static IP.
Many people don't seem to understand just how good "home" connections can be in some countries.
Many people don't seem to understand just how good "home" connections can be in some countries.
Right, he could always pay the additional $4/Month for a static IP.
I wasn't attempting to be a smart ***, but a majority of people don't have the connection speed, quality or server power that they need.
Chances are that if your ISP won't sell you a static IP, that they don't want people hosting servers.
My ISP sells a static ip and it's not an extra 4$ per month. It's almost 40 euros extra. I have a fiber connection and I already pay 60 euros per month for 100mbps down/60mbps up which I'm pretty sure is more than adequate to host a server on. And my ISP don't have problems with people hosting things at home. I asked.
You're good on bandwidth. Latency is affected by the amount of hops to the backbone, but I guess it shouldn't be a problem for most.
Maybe you could buy one of those cheap 7EUR VPS and forward your communication through its static IP like a proxy server? I wonder how badly it would hurt the latency.
A majority of people over here actually have the bandwidth. I'm kind of in the same spot, 100/100 connect, 4 ms latency to the backbone, which costs me about 30 month. A static IP would cost me almost 50% of that, about 20 bucks a month, a price I don't want to pay out of principle.
I get that static IP's aren't supported, just saying that you can have a good connection without a static IP.
And you'd be one of them. You think GSP's get some magical hardware the rest of the world can't get or something?
I'd guess that they don't want to have to constantly edit the server white list to update server IP's, because they've changed. Although even if your IP is dynamic you could still apply. They have no way of knowing unless your IP changes if your IP is static or not.
Sure and the moment it changes your unranked again, so what would be the point? My Dynamic IP can and does change ten times a day.
Which is pretty much why I have a serverbox in a DC with Static IP and its own DNS.
Pretty sure Buster knows his way around a server or three.
Which is pretty much why I have a serverbox in a DC with Static IP and its own DNS.
Pretty sure Buster knows his way around a server or three.
Last edited:
10 times a day? Are you serious? Mine has changed less than 10 times in the last 5 years - and that's only when I have to reset the modem for whatever reason... and even then I would say 9 times out of 10 it comes back up with the same IP. What are you doing with your box that the IP changes so frequently?
And it's not like having a DC is a big deal... a 3rd grader could run dcpromo in Server 2003 and figure it out. Server 2010 is even easier. (I know... because I've got two servers on my home network - one with each OS.)
I'm just trying to figure out if paying the extra $20 month for a static IP is worth it... and so far I'm not able to see the justification.