Good morning Ed,

>>John,
>>
>>Ok.. So it sounds like WinXP can handle this pretty well. That's good to know.
>>
>>I'm in the process of establishing a high speed connection to my home (for those really snowy days <g>) and we're looking at using static IP addresses for the security stuff. I'm glad to hear that there are alternatives.
>>
>
>You can function without static IP; Deerfield offers a service called DNS2Go, which will maintain a consistantly-resolvable DNS address for a dynamic IP connection through their DNS server. www.deerfield.com - for the people like me who've been using it non-commercially during the beta, it's a free service; there's a nominal monthly charge for personal use, and a cost approaching that of registering a domain for a year for commercial applications (well under $100/year.)

Hmm.. Thanks.. I'll check into it. The static IP costs an extra $10 per month so cost-wise it looks like an even trade.

Have you checked out their security? Or perhaps I should ask, what do you think of their security after checking it out? <g>


>
>>
>
>I'm very happy with the remote session service from XP; I'm using that and remote desktop access in NetMeeting quite successfully, although I had to open a couple of IP ports to get it working.

We're in a situation where we want to have as few ports open as possible.