Hi Josh,
On Tuesday 29 June 2010 08:00:18 Josh MacCraw wrote:
> Uh Gaffer needs to read & process the info better! The only "bridge
> mode" here is on the *DSL MODEM* which is where the *ROUTER* sends
> the PPOE credentials (if even needed) instead of the modem resulting
> in a live IP on the router's WAN port instead of being double NAT'd.
Would you care to clarify your comments.
> On 6/28/2010 3:47 PM, Gaffer wrote:
> > Hi Duncan,
> >
> > On Monday 28 June 2010 21:50:10 DSinc wrote:
> >> Gaffer,
> >> My replies are inline............
> >> TNX, anyway.
> >>
> >> On 06/28/2010 15:45, Gaffer wrote:
> >>> On Monday 28 June 2010 18:54:39 DSinc wrote:
> >>>> I still use xDSL. Soon I will move to FIOS. Well, as I get
> >>>> smarter and answer my ?many? questions (another thread in play!)
> >>>>
> >>>> I am beginning (again) to have trouble with my xDSL connection.
> >>>> I suspect someone local (or ?) keeps camping out on my assigned
> >>>> IP addy from my ISP so that they can just dick with my xDSL
> >>>> modem or my Router.
> >>>>
> >>>> I know I have my xDSL modem set to a "bridge" mode. I suspect
> >>>> this makes it a straight wire connection to my Router's WAN
> >>>> port.
> >>>
> >>> I would never use "Bridge Mode" unless I was feeding a box that
> >>> was specifically setup to be a firewall, something like "IP Cop".
> >>
> >> Should I NOT use "bridge mode" in my TELCO-supplied modem I would
> >> be Double Nat-ng and have 2 firewalls.
> >
> > If you are using your router in bridge mode then it is not doing
> > NAT or firewalling. Just because Wins has what it calls a firewall
> > has nothing to do with NAT.
> >
> >> I view this as excess overhead.
> >> Perhaps my bad.
> >> My router does both NAT and supports its' own firewall and SPI.
> >> Both of these selections have been activated since day one!
> >
> > You can't have it both ways ! If you have the router firewall
> > switched on and NAT switched on its not in "Bridge Mode"
> >
> >>>> I think I have my Router as |strong| as I currently comprehend
> >>>> its' directions.
> >>>
> >>> Your router is not being used as anything but a modem. Its most
> >>> valuable assets are being thrown away by it being configured as
> >>> it is.
> >>
> >> Can you please share some more logic to this? I believe that my
> >> Router is my single point of 1st protection to Inbound stuff. Or,
> >> perhaps you and I are "wired" differently. This comment I do not
> >> understand.
> >
> > I doubt that we are "wired" differently. :-)
> > But you are right, the router should be the 1st point of
> > protection. If you really have "Bridge Mode" turned on, then its
> > simply a modem without offering any protection. All "Bridge Mode"
> > does is pass on the IP address that the ISP assigns to your
> > connection.
> >
> >>>> Turns out, I have to save Router logs and reboot the Router
> >>>> about every 3-7 days to recover a semi-firm connection. The
> >>>> Router is a DLink DGL-4300. All wireless is disabled. I use
> >>>> wired LAN only.
> >>>
> >>> I use a Dlink router. I have mine set to firewall and NAT. The
> >>> firewall blocks all unrequested incoming traffic and lets
> >>> everything out. NAT allows me to use a range of IP addresses
> >>> that are not Internet routeable effectively allowing the use of
> >>> several machines from the single IP that my ISP assigns me.
> >>> Which incidentally changes each time I restart the router.
> >>
> >> OK. Understand this logic. Same-same. That's how life is here too.
> >> The problem is I have to re-boot the Router several times a day!
> >
> > This is a totally different issue !
> > This could simply be a noisy incoming line providing a weak noisy
> > signal. In fact a weak noisy signal to the router could be
> > anywhere between the CO and the router.
> >
> > Or it could be that the router is dieing. I've replaced my router
> > several times because its performance has become degraded, probably
> > due to high voltage transients on the telephone line feeding it.
> > I've also had the spark gaps replaced because they have been
> > damaged during thunder storms.
> >
> >>>> Is this possible? Do not know why someone local chooses to pick
> >>>> on me? I will suppose giggles and laughs for the present!
> >>>> This is the same view to me as past electrical storm
> >>>> interference I had with an older (retired) xdsl modem.
> >
> > The more I read your post, the more I'm inclined to think that the
> > router could be suspect and the electrical storm interference you
> > refer to could be the reason.
> >
> >>> Its quite possible that you have a tracking beacon installed on
> >>> your machine that reports your machines presence on the Internet.
> >>> In all probability you wouldn't know if you had.
> >>
> >> Please share more about "tracking beacon's?" I will go do a
> >> search/destroy on them as necessary. I have yet to find one/any
> >> yet!
> >
> > OK ! how about the ones that you installed as part of installing
> > the driver for a piece of hardware...
> >
> >>>> Yes, I do NOT KNOW that I might already have an internal
> >>>> "baddie" in play; other than every scanner I have used comes up
> >>>> negative.
> >>>
> >>> What makes you think a scanner will find and report every
> >>> "baddie" that you might have on your machine.
> >>
> >> Oh, I do not. I use what I use. I then use what is suggested to me
> >> by my betters. And, most of the time, I do find a hint from this
> >> List! I have both patience and trust in this List. This anomaly is
> >> just another matter of time at best. At worst, I do so hope the
> >> miscreant will eventually burn in hell!
> >>
> >>>> Thought? Suggestions? Ideas?
> >>>> Best,
> >>>> Duncan
> >
> > Wireshark is good...
--
Best Regards:
Derrick.
Running Open SuSE 11.1 KDE 3.5.10 Desktop.
Pontefract Linux Users Group.
plug @ play-net.co.uk
