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