Re: network question - is this unusual?
- From: fred smith <fredex@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 19:21:43 -0400
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 04:01:51PM -0700, Gerhard Magnus wrote:
I recently had to deal with my ISP about a connectivity problem that
turned out to be on their end. (The tech referred to linux as lie-nux
and insisted on doing everything in XP which I fortunately had
dual-booted.) But in the process of working through this it was
necessary for me to describe the way I'd set up my LAN here and he
seemed incredulous. This wouldn't bother me except that I've gotten this
reaction before from people in the outside world but never an
explanation. So I'm asking: is there something weird about this
structure? Is there some "better" or more standard setup?
I would think there's nothing unusual about this.
The tech is probably used to totally clueless people who just plug
their windoze box directly into the provided modem, rather than people
who have a home LAN.
I had a similar setup for years even when we still used dialup here for
our connectivity. A PC running Smoothwall, using PPP to connect to my
ISP and letting PPP auto-dial when it felt the need to go online. Slow,
yes, but everything "just worked". Switching to cable was a no-brainer,
mostly: did a second Smoothwall installation on another crappy old PC,
(just in case I ever wanted to revert, so I wouldn't have blown away a
known-working configuration) configured it to use a 2nd ethernet card
for the WAN side in lieu of the modem and we were off to the races! (some
time later I got a cheap linksys router to use instead, primarily because
it uses about a tenth the power of the old PC.)
The DSL modem Actiontec modem provided by Quest plugs into the phone
jack. The Actiontec is an older model with only one ethernet plug. Since
I have four boxes, two of which are dual booting Fedora and XP, I have
an ethernet cable connecting the modem to the DSL plug of a Linksys
router. I then have separate cables connecting the four outlets on the
router to each of the four boxes. (I did all this cabling at a time
before wireless routing was as available and cheap as it is today.)
Each of the six operating systems (4 linux and 2 XP) has a static IP
address and each has a firewall. I have NFS running on the linux
systems. There's another firewall on the router, which is currently
port-forwarding only ssh and torrent data from the outside world.
I thought I'd check this out before going further....
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
--
---- Fred Smith -- fredex@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -----------------------------
"And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father,
Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government there will be no end. He
will reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding
it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever."
------------------------------- Isaiah 9:7 (niv) ------------------------------
Attachment:
pgpCUc4q7aA87.pgp
Description: PGP signature
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
- References:
- network question - is this unusual?
- From: Gerhard Magnus
- network question - is this unusual?
- Prev by Date: Re: WUSB54G firmware
- Next by Date: Re: update to F11 with yum
- Previous by thread: network question - is this unusual?
- Next by thread: Re: network question - is this unusual?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
