Originally posted by wyvern
You could try using DSLReport's tools, some of which have a little button that says "My Public IP is..." which you click, and then it tells you your public ip. (Duh.) There are other ways to do it as well, involving scripting the download of a cgi-generated webpage which includes the IP that requested it.
Yes, but unless the NAT is opened to forward traffic to the FTP server, knowing the external address isn't gonna do any good.
Three ways around this:
1.
Somehow convince the admin of the NAT to open it up to allow the traffic through to the Mac. Not likely, since the NAT implies that everyone behind it is meant to be a consumer (see below rant), not a provider.
2. Get external hosting. This has the disadvantages of costing money and being possibly limited WRT what they'll let you control.
3. Find a server-friendly ISP. This is the option I would choose if I was in this state. Jill, you don't mention where you live, so it may not help, but you might have a look at
Speakeasy if this is an option that you want to investigate. They aren't as cheap as other options, but they explicitly make it easy to set up servers on your connection.
<rant>
I find it increasingly infuriating the number if ISPs that make the assumption that their users should simply be good little consumers and not set up any kind of servers on their networks. Cable is particularly bad for this, but there's so many stories of ISPs who block inbound traffic to well-known ports (80, 22, 21, 23, etc), to prevent their users adding to the richness of the net.
It seems that these ISPs believe that the internet is meant to be just like TV - consume all you want, but you couldn't possibly have any reason to want to have a voice, unless you're some kind of music/movie/software pirate, terrorist or something.
I'm not arguing that someone be allowed to saturate their link 24x7. The fact is, that $40-$50/mo is not really paying for the theoretical bandwith available on the connection. ISPs have always oversold capacity - that's the only way to make a profit. But, if I have some low-volume webserver, I present no particular operating difficulty to the ISP, but that doesn't seem to matter to them...
What's even more disturbing is that their customers don't seem to be speaking up on this topic. Do so few people care enough about this to raise the kind of stink required to change this?
</rant>
FWIW, my ISP (DSL through the phone company - not a BabyBell)
does allow servers, nats, whatever on my connection, so long as I do not adversely impact their operations. I'm among the few people I know that actually
like their phone company...
