Other than internet based services, nothing requires an internet
connection, so I wouldn't expect a problem there. However, I don't see
any reason you couldn't just wire the Thomson unit to your network once
you get to Scotland and use it as a second AP (or disable whatever's
there) if it works
Michael Herger;211989 Wrote:
Well, you are mistaken :-). If you have a gigabit switch, connecting a
single 100Mb device won't influence the other machines. No need to
separate them.
So having the 10/100 router assign IP's via DHCP also won't influence
the other machines? Great to know,
Now that I've had some time I've thought this through and have corrected
the issue without resorting to a single subnet - the key reason I
implemented two to begin with (which I should have mentioned at the
outset) is that the 192.168.168.x subnet provides gigabit connectivity
between all PCs and
implemented two to begin with (which I should have mentioned at the
outset) is that the 192.168.168.x subnet provides gigabit connectivity
between all PCs and NAS devices. Changing to a single subnet would
force the 10/100 broadband router into the equation, which, if I'm not
mistaken will
All I can say is that you're gaining nothing in terms of security with
that configuration. For increased security and peace of mind you'd be
better off putting a good firewall between the network and the router.
Then create firewall rules saying (for instance) that the NAS at
192.168.1.5 and
egd wrote:
JJZolx;192940 Wrote:
By not exposed, can we assume you mean that the .168.x network has no
means of contacting the outside world?
Yes, albeit I presume if a connected Internet facing device is
compromised it can in turn be used to attempt compromise of devices on
the
JJZolx;192940 Wrote:
Simplify. Use just one subnet.
I'd set up the Squeezeboxes and laptops to use DHCP from the router.
The NASs and the PC running SlimServer would probably be best served
with static addresses. The router shouldn't allow any uninitiated
inbound traffic to reach any
Also your sig says Linux and loving it which means:
- you're not using IE/OE
- your OS is fairly secure by default (you likely run on a restricted
account)
- you're not the target of the millions of Chinese script kiddies
So you already have a fairly significant security advantage over Joe
In addition, if you had an old PC in a closet, install 'SmoothWall'
(http://www.smoothwall.org/) on it and turn it into a
corporate-strength firewall at no cost.
--
Mark Lanctot
Mark Lanctot's Profile:
egd;192965 Wrote:
Ok, assuming I go down this path have I interpreted you correctly?:
- Hard code NAS and PC running slimserver IPs to 192.168.1.x
subnet, say .2, .3 .4
- Set 2nd PC, wireless EOP, laptop and any other devices I choose
to connect to the network to use
egd;192916 Wrote:
_HISTORICAL_STATE:_
a
- I have two PCs, two NAS devices and two SB3s networked via an
unmanaged gigabit switch, all with hardcoded IPs using the
192.168.168.x range.
- The SB3s are located outside of the study and take their audio
feed from one of the NAS
JJZolx;192940 Wrote:
By not exposed, can we assume you mean that the .168.x network has no
means of contacting the outside world?
Yes, albeit I presume if a connected Internet facing device is
compromised it can in turn be used to attempt compromise of devices on
the .168.x network.
JJZolx
12 matches
Mail list logo
