Make a server where only 1 log-in per account is allowed.

Comacast uses Level 3 connections for all its networks.

There isn't a content provider that does not use a level 3 connection. Level 3 connections are the largest backbone of the internet together with internet exchange points, in the world.

we do, they have been called level 3 connections everywhere from old Distributed Network books to today's Centurylink articles.

No one cares who owns the connections, we still call them level 3.

"layer 3" Funny joke. But I know my network stuff, if you knew what level 3 was, you wouldn't have tried to correct me.

So....Level 3 isn't a company anymore. How do they use Level 3 for connections if it doesn't exist anymore?

Because fiberglass doesn't evaporate just because the company has new leadership. No one spent more money on fiberglass in the US than Level 3. The internet backbone will still be used in 30 years, no matter who owns the company.

The United States is still called the United States when a president changes.

What is your actual problem with me.

So do you call all the WilTel connections Level 3 bought Wiltel still? What about Global Crossing, or TW Telecom?

Are you really trying to say Layer 3 is not a real thing in networking? Please get help. Just because you work on the helpdesk somewhere closing service now tickets does not make you a network engineer.

Because it isn't the United States of Trump? There is no need to label it something different each election?

Also a change in leadership is much different than being acquired by someone. Side note, most of the L3 leadership was promoted after the acquisition and the CTL leadership was let go.

I'm fine, but thanks for the suggestion. Now that you learned what level 3 is, nice talking to you.

That it was a company and not a part of the OSI Model? Yep you learned me gud!

Where I live I believe it's $140 a month for a business line with static IP addresses. Not exactly a bank breaker. Internet is a bit expensive here anyway. The least you could get by with is about $70 a month.

<wiping eyes> This thread is awesome.

5 IPs for 30-50€ per month Including telephone flat and 200mbit service.
For a little bit more you can have 1gig connection ...

That's pretty good. I have gigabit service. I pay $100 a month. Like I said, sort of expensive here (Cox, Las Vegas).

They've done you one better, they created one where you can have zero logins instead of one

The catch with the OP suggestion is that those of us whose ISP uses CGNAT would be restricted to only one player from each port on their router being able to play.

I have FTTP (so fast Internet) but share my IP with a couple of hundred other ISP clients. I can get a seperate, static IP at $50/month, but I'm not going to pay an extra $600/year unless I'm running servers from home.

I don't think Netflix really tries to stop VPNs... if they wanted to they could, but they'd stop all VPNs.

Using technical jargon doesn't change the fact that you are indeed wrong about having multiple IP's over a single line. You need a hub or switch. That's it. I have 10 static IP's for one business, and no issue adding any additional static IP's if I am willing to pay for it, and each additional static address is only ~$15/month if I recall correctly.

It's all moot anyways, because you can run comparative quality internet via cellular connection. Guess what else? You can even get "burner" data plans *gasp*.. For someone who fancies themselves a network engineer, you really have a hard time making connections. Mr. Strawberry.

I'd also like to add that your suggestion of logging in "once per IP address" doesn't make sense as a stand-alone statement. Does that mean that I log in, play for a while, log off to go to sleep, work the next day, and try to log in when I get home to a notification that says "sorry, you already logged in once, but thanks for your month-long subscription."? I'm not sure you even made a coherent suggestion before the thread devolved into a "i KnOw MoAr AbOuT tHe InTeRnEtS". Clear one hurdle at a time here.

Pretty sure that's not what he meant. Pretty sure you know it, too.

I have no idea what he meant by this. Face value makes no sense. If the account was also IP locked, and only available to that specific IP address, then people traveling or trying to access the game at work would similarly be blocked. If you know, please explain to me. I'm not trying to get into a pissing match, genuinely curious as to his original suggestion.

You may be right. I thought he simply meant one character per IP address.