Re: routing problem?
From: /dev/rob0 (rob0_at_gmx.co.uk)
Date: 08/09/03
- Next message: /dev/rob0: "Re: Question from the New Guy"
- Previous message: Christian Dysthe: "Re: Running an application automatically after a ssh login."
- In reply to: melissa: "Re: [OT] routing problem?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 08:02:14 -0700
In article <slrnbj928a.im.private@debian.lan>, melissa wrote:
> Thanks for your suggestions. It works now, /etc/resolv.conf was ok but
> I had still put AP's IP address as gw on the laptop *embarrassed*
Yeah, that one occurred to me after I posted too. Should have looked at
$SUBJECT again. :) Glad we got things sorted for you. BTW last weekend I
had this very same issue at a customer site, and I checked everything
imaginable before getting around to the non-DHCP'ed client's default
route. DOH!
Getting this squarely ON topic again (and taking out your "[OT]" :) I'll
again mention DHCP. DHCP is your friend. You put network configuration
matters all in one place, the DHCP server. You won't have maddeningly
simple things like this trip you up, because when you set a new gateway
address on the server, it propagates automagically to the clients!
Since you're up to more than 3 machines, I think DHCP would be worth
your time to learn. And as with most of this stuff, it's really not that
difficult, and is fairly well-documented.
>>>> BTW this really is OT here ... it's a D-Link router issue, not Linux.
>>>>
> This question is really offtopic so I added it again :) I don't
> understand how is the WAN port different from the LAN ports, and why
I didn't probe deeply enough to figure that out, myself. It seems that
there's a built-in firewall from WAN to LAN, and they don't give you the
option to turn it off. My original plan was like yours: set up a Linux
box to look like an ISP to the router. But the router protected its LAN
ports (and the wireless segment) from me!
I could have done something like a VPN, perhaps, using one of the D-Link
LAN machines as a gateway to the outer LAN. But I opted for simplicity,
and accepted the fact that I only had a 3-port switch in the WAP. (One
port being used to connect to another switch, that is.)
If you do play with it and manage to find a way to make the WAN port
useful, please let me know, $preferred_email in .sig below.
> my original setup didn't work (except maybe with DMZ). I could still
> return the AP and buy something else (if I paid for some feature
> there's no use for), but do all wireless AP/routers have this issue?
This is the only one I've had, and it was the cheapest I could find.
There's the irony: if you find something with fewer features, you'll
probably pay more for it. :)
They market these things to lusers who would otherwise use Windows for
their Internet connection. Clueful people are a VERY small segment in
the computer market, due in part to the fact that the rise of the
Internet has given new people (who have no interest in computing) the
desire to own a computer, and in part to Microsoft's powerful marketing
strategy which is designed to keep their users ignorant. So a simple
Ethernet-to-wireless bridge device, although cheaper to produce, would
not be in high demand.
Here's another thought I had: when I go on holiday, my laptop and the
WAP will go with me. The router features might come in handy on the
road. I have friends who know nothing about computers, but who might
let me stay and share their Internet for a short time. Although I don't
use those features here, I might use them somewhere, sometime.
-- /dev/rob0 - preferred_email=i$((28*28+28))@softhome.net or put "not-spam" or "/dev/rob0" in Subject header to reply
- Next message: /dev/rob0: "Re: Question from the New Guy"
- Previous message: Christian Dysthe: "Re: Running an application automatically after a ssh login."
- In reply to: melissa: "Re: [OT] routing problem?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
