Re: Comcast & Routing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Saturday, August 2, 2003, 3:33:49 PM, Lee wrote: > 1) Establish the LAN using private IP addresses and a hub. You want to use a router with a built-in hub/switch. If you already have a hub/switch, then you can get a router without one built in and save a very small amount of money. > 2) Connect the hub to the cable modem. Connect the router to the cable modem. > 3) Connect to the Internet directly from the Linux box, then configure > the Windoze box to use the Linux box as a proxy server so I can surf the > web from the Windoze box (all my email etc. will go to the Linux box). No. Unless you plan to use the Linux box as the router (two Ethernet cards), then you want it sitting on the *inside* network. Both systems know that to get their packets where they are supposed to go, that they must go towards the router. The Linux box needn't be concerned with what's going on with the other box, unless you explicitly want to experiment with setting up and running a proxy server. (Or, perhaps the Linux box has lots of free disk and you want to experiment with performance of having it cache web pages.) Email is another matter. It will be tricky to get your Email to "go to the Linux Box". Less tricky will probably be setting up fetchmail to "have the Linux Box get" your Email. The other fellow, who started this thread, was indicating that he saw no performance difference using the router. This says to me that he likely has things configured wrong. He probably got snookered by the Comcast line about how you need to pay them for an IP address for every computer in your home. He then probably configured each of those computers with their own IP, and they all think that the only way to get to them is via the Internet link, implying that the routing tables are hosed. What he *should* have done (and it probably is not too late) is to realize that only those computers that are actually connected to the Comcast network need their own IP address. In my household of *several* computers, only one computer is attached to the Comcast network. It has its own IP address that it gets from the service. The computer is made by a company called Linksys, their model BEFSR11. My Linksys computer is also connected to my home network, but that is no concern of Comcast's. (Linksys also has model BEFSR41 with a 4-port switch built in and the BEFSR81 with an 8-port switch built in. According to the prices at www.cdw.com, the BEFSR41 is the "sweet spot" right now, just a little more expensive than a month's worth of Comcast Internet service in my area.) If I ever catch grief from Comcast about my choice of computer to be sitting on their network, I will be happy to put together a dual Ethernet Linux box to replace it. However, I found nothing in their Terms of Service that attempted to restrict the type of computer so attached. For simple things, you tell your Linksys computer (router) that it should be handling the forwarding of DNS requests and acting as DHCP server. Then, your other systems all come up and ask for a DHCP server to tell them how to behave, and life is good. I wanted a few things beyond this, so have set up a Linux box as the home network's DNS server and DHCP server. In-home DNS cacheing is a good thing. Note that Comcast probably would have a knee-jerk reaction to the presence of servers, but A) they are not connected to their network (although some are accessible via it), and B) they are not for public use. So, I figure that they have more important concerns (like not having the service fail five minutes after their ad touts it as never disconnecting and being "always available"). > Also, if I want to share my printer between the two machines, in you > guys' experience is it better/simpler to hang the printer off the > Windows box or the Linux box? I have not seen any difference. However, I cheat. I use a *real* printer that does Postscript. :-) In general, though, I have found that adding duties to UNIX/Linux boxen to be no big deal. On the other hand, the more you ask a Windows box to do, the more trouble you are asking for. Ron. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.8 Comment: Until recently, the last PGP with full source disclosure. iQA/AwUBPy7SI28pw+2/9pUJEQKv5QCeK2oWtbTCr9UTDZJUpmrL7BRBjaQAoMz+ OvY+4awmHDV78tvJYM39r69y =dm1f -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Re: Comcast & Routing
Ed Wilts wrote: What I do is connect a Linksys router/firewall to the cable modem. Yes, that seems like it would be the best solution. Thanks for the suggestions all. --Lee -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
RE: Comcast & Routing
Yes, you could set up a web proxy and the Windows machine would be able to surf the Internet without having a direct connection and you would not have to arrange for a router. But I don't think many people do this for a few reasons. First, the Windows box will have web access (of some quality) but nothing else. I say "of some quality" because I'm sure some websites wouldn't work through this setup. Also, you will not be able to make connections using any other protocol, including say, downloading email, FTP, etc. If, instead, you arranged a router, you will have almost complete access from both computers (a few FTP sites may be unreachable, some exotic protocols cannot be masq'd). Also, I've never run a proxy but I paged through the squid docs before I decided to forget about it... a web proxy probably isn't any easier to set up than a router and perhaps harder to maintain. For example, it's much more resource intensive due to needing to cache documents. An old 486 without a hard drive will due nicely as a router using something like LEAF. -Alan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sat 8/2/2003 6:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject:Re: Comcast & Routing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Second, maybe this is just semantics, but you do not need a proxy server. (did you >mean connection sharing?) A proxy catches web requests and checks to see if it >already has the page in its cache. This will speed up web access in some situations >enormously but I've never thought the it was worthwhile for one or two people. > Maybe I'm delusional, but I thought setting up a proxy server (like squid) and allowing access to my Windoze box would allow me to surf the web from the Windoze box without having to set up IP masquerading. Assuming I have the 2 machines plugged into a hub (I do already have a hub) and the uplink of the hub goes to the cable modem, and the 2 machines are via private IP LAN, I could configure my browser to retrieve web pages from the proxy server (the RH box), which would go out and get the web page off the Internet and send it to the Windoze browser. No? Lee -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Re: Comcast & Routing
Establish the internl network using a "cable router". All local IPs are then assigned by the router , and the router goes to the cable and gets its EXTERNAL IP there. The cable sees your net as one address, and all internal messaging stays internal, with only the internet bound traffic actually going out. Incoming internet messages are routed to the appropriate boxes, by the router.. (which may also provide some some useful firewall service.) Using a hub and letting all the internal boxes go directly to the cable modem lleaves all your internal network wide open. Also most cable services only allow one IP per account (non business) and can shut you down for putting more than one pc directly connected. brian:) /// At 04:33 PM 8/2/03 -0400, Lee Flier wrote: >I will soon have a similar situation... I have two computers at home. >One is the one I'm using now which is currently dual boot RH9/Windows >98. It's connected to the Internet via cable modem (RCA) and has a >static IP address. > >What I would like to do is install RH9 on a second computer, have a >private LAN with the two machines, so that files/printers can be >shared. I would also like them to share my Internet connection without >having to obtain a second static IP address from my ISP. I am not a >network guru by any means, so I've been reading up on the subject, and >it seems there are several different ways this could be done. What I am >thinking would be the simplest way is this: > >1) Establish the LAN using private IP addresses and a hub. > >2) Connect the hub to the cable modem. > >3) Connect to the Internet directly from the Linux box, then configure >the Windoze box to use the Linux box as a proxy server so I can surf the >web from the Windoze box (all my email etc. will go to the Linux box). > >Is this workable? Is it the simplest way to do what I want or is there >a better way? > >Also, if I want to share my printer between the two machines, in you >guys' experience is it better/simpler to hang the printer off the >Windows box or the Linux box? > >Thanks, >Lee > > >-- >redhat-list mailing list >unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list > --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Re: Comcast & Routing
On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 04:59:56PM -0400, Lee Flier wrote: > Otto Haliburton wrote: > > >Yes, what you are wanting to do is doable, but remember that in general > >you will not get support from Comcast for linux, > > > Yes, I'm aware of that. :-) I already have it working fine with Linux > on my dual boot machine, it's just making the two private IP's work with > the one static/public IP that I'm a little hazy on. What I do is connect a Linksys router/firewall to the cable modem. In my case, it's got the dynamic address, but you can configure yours with the static IP. Then the systems connected to the firewall connect using a private IP address (192.168.0.x) and have their default gateway set to the router (which has two addresses - one facing in and one facing out - the one you want to point to is the internal one). Once you've solved the outgoing connections, just turn on port forwarding for the inbound connections for things like http or smtp. -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Member #1, Red Hat Community Ambassador Program -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
RE: Comcast & Routing
I believe that is correct, I also believe that connection sharing is a fancy way of using a proxy. I could be wrong but I don't think so. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:redhat-list- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lee Flier > Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 5:17 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Comcast & Routing > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Second, maybe this is just semantics, but you do not need a proxy > server. (did you mean connection sharing?) A proxy catches web > requests and checks to see if it already has the page in its cache. > This will speed up web access in some situations enormously but I've > never thought the it was worthwhile for one or two people. > > > Maybe I'm delusional, but I thought setting up a proxy server (like > squid) and allowing access to my Windoze box would allow me to surf > the > web from the Windoze box without having to set up IP masquerading. > Assuming I have the 2 machines plugged into a hub (I do already have a > hub) and the uplink of the hub goes to the cable modem, and the 2 > machines are via private IP LAN, I could configure my browser to > retrieve web pages from the proxy server (the RH box), which would go > out and get the web page off the Internet and send it to the Windoze > browser. No? > > Lee > > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Re: Comcast & Routing
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Second, maybe this is just semantics, but you do not need a proxy server. (did you mean connection sharing?) A proxy catches web requests and checks to see if it already has the page in its cache. This will speed up web access in some situations enormously but I've never thought the it was worthwhile for one or two people. Maybe I'm delusional, but I thought setting up a proxy server (like squid) and allowing access to my Windoze box would allow me to surf the web from the Windoze box without having to set up IP masquerading. Assuming I have the 2 machines plugged into a hub (I do already have a hub) and the uplink of the hub goes to the cable modem, and the 2 machines are via private IP LAN, I could configure my browser to retrieve web pages from the proxy server (the RH box), which would go out and get the web page off the Internet and send it to the Windoze browser. No? Lee -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Re: Comcast & Routing
The way I've done it is to have your linux box contain two NICs. Eth0 (NIC#1) connects to your cable modem. Eth1 (NIC#2) connects to your Windows Box's NIC via a cross-over cat5 cable. Then activate connection sharing in your Linux box by assigning Eth0 to your internet IP address and Eth1 to your local IP address (192.168.0.1) which will be the gateway for your Windows box. On your Windows box, set your ip address to 192.168.0.2 and your gateway address to 192.168.0.1 and netmask 255.255.255.0. For DNS, use the same settings as your Linux box. Also, connection sharing in your linux box might end up running a DHCPd in which case, you could just set your Windows box to DHCP. This path eliminates the need for a hub or switch. If down the road you want to get more PCs then you'll need that hub/switch. Lee Flier wrote: I will soon have a similar situation... I have two computers at home. One is the one I'm using now which is currently dual boot RH9/Windows 98. It's connected to the Internet via cable modem (RCA) and has a static IP address. What I would like to do is install RH9 on a second computer, have a private LAN with the two machines, so that files/printers can be shared. I would also like them to share my Internet connection without having to obtain a second static IP address from my ISP. I am not a network guru by any means, so I've been reading up on the subject, and it seems there are several different ways this could be done. What I am thinking would be the simplest way is this: 1) Establish the LAN using private IP addresses and a hub. 2) Connect the hub to the cable modem. 3) Connect to the Internet directly from the Linux box, then configure the Windoze box to use the Linux box as a proxy server so I can surf the web from the Windoze box (all my email etc. will go to the Linux box). Is this workable? Is it the simplest way to do what I want or is there a better way? Also, if I want to share my printer between the two machines, in you guys' experience is it better/simpler to hang the printer off the Windows box or the Linux box? Thanks, Lee -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
RE: Comcast & Routing
I hope this isn't being sent as HTML... if so, I'm sorry, there is no option in this web interface to turn it off. You almost have it. Two things: First, some magic has to happen to allow both machines to share a single IP address. Recent Windows calls it Connection Sharing, IIRC, and in Linux circles it's called NAT (Network address translation) or IP Masquerading. So you will need some sort of device, either a computer or a network device plugged in between your LAN and the Internet to perform NAT. The *simplest* solution is to but a cheap network device. My Linksys device cost about $120, IIRC, and has a 4-port dual speed hub, acts as a wireless access point, runs a DHCP server, is a DHCP client, and has a pretty good web-based interface for configuration. A linux box could easily do NAT and the DHCP stuff. I did this usng RH for a long time, then replaced it with a LEAF (Linux router; leaf.sourceforge.net) box, then bought the Linksys box for the wireless access. DHCP, in case you're not familiar, relieves you from having to manually assign static internal network addresses... not a big deal for two computers but a nice feature sometimes. My laptop appreciates it, for example. Why do you have a static IP? If you expect any in-bound traffic (e.g., you want to "host" games like Unreal Tournament or you're running a web- or mail server) then it will be important to be able to expose internal ports externally. The LEAF Linux distribution and the Linksys (and surely other dedicated devices/distros) have special ways to make this easy. I would say that the Linksys device is much simpler to configure but far more limited than the LEAF distro. Second, maybe this is just semantics, but you do not need a proxy server. (did you mean connection sharing?) A proxy catches web requests and checks to see if it already has the page in its cache. This will speed up web access in some situations enormously but I've never thought the it was worthwhile for one or two people. If the Windows is one of the old DOS flavors, forget it. If it's a choice between a Windows NT flavor and Linux/Samba then it's more of a toss, up. I'd see which has been driver support. Support in RH 9 seems very good, click-click-click and I've set up printers that I could never make work properly using earlier versions. Linux will be more reliable than WIndows, IMHO. -Alan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sat 8/2/2003 4:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject:Re: Comcast & Routing I will soon have a similar situation... I have two computers at home. One is the one I'm using now which is currently dual boot RH9/Windows 98. It's connected to the Internet via cable modem (RCA) and has a static IP address. What I would like to do is install RH9 on a second computer, have a private LAN with the two machines, so that files/printers can be shared. I would also like them to share my Internet connection without having to obtain a second static IP address from my ISP. I am not a network guru by any means, so I've been reading up on the subject, and it seems there are several different ways this could be done. What I am thinking would be the simplest way is this: 1) Establish the LAN using private IP addresses and a hub. 2) Connect the hub to the cable modem. 3) Connect to the Internet directly from the Linux box, then configure the Windoze box to use the Linux box as a proxy server so I can surf the web from the Windoze box (all my email etc. will go to the Linux box). Is this workable? Is it the simplest way to do what I want or is there a better way? Also, if I want to share my printer between the two machines, in you guys' experience is it better/simpler to hang the printer off the Windows box or the Linux box? Thanks, Lee -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
RE: Comcast & Routing
Do the windoze to get support from Comcast and setup proxy account with linux and it doesn't matter where you get your email from or browse the internet. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:redhat-list- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lee Flier > Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 4:00 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Comcast & Routing > > Otto Haliburton wrote: > > >Yes, what you are wanting to do is doable, but remember that in > general > >you will not get support from Comcast for linux, > > > Yes, I'm aware of that. :-) I already have it working fine with Linux > on my dual boot machine, it's just making the two private IP's work > with > the one static/public IP that I'm a little hazy on. > > > so if you can't get by > >on your own I would do the reverse until you are up to speed on how > the > >network stuff works. > > > How do you mean "do the reverse?" > > > Also look into getting SAMBA to work and NFS etc. > > > > Yes, I think I'm getting a grip on all that, though I may have > questions > when I get into it! > > Thanks, > Lee > > > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Re: Comcast & Routing
Otto Haliburton wrote: Yes, what you are wanting to do is doable, but remember that in general you will not get support from Comcast for linux, Yes, I'm aware of that. :-) I already have it working fine with Linux on my dual boot machine, it's just making the two private IP's work with the one static/public IP that I'm a little hazy on. so if you can't get by on your own I would do the reverse until you are up to speed on how the network stuff works. How do you mean "do the reverse?" Also look into getting SAMBA to work and NFS etc. Yes, I think I'm getting a grip on all that, though I may have questions when I get into it! Thanks, Lee -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
RE: Comcast & Routing
Yes, what you are wanting to do is doable, but remember that in general you will not get support from Comcast for linux, so if you can't get by on your own I would do the reverse until you are up to speed on how the network stuff works. Also look into getting SAMBA to work and NFS etc. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:redhat-list- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lee Flier > Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 3:34 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Comcast & Routing > > I will soon have a similar situation... I have two computers at home. > One is the one I'm using now which is currently dual boot RH9/Windows > 98. It's connected to the Internet via cable modem (RCA) and has a > static IP address. > > What I would like to do is install RH9 on a second computer, have a > private LAN with the two machines, so that files/printers can be > shared. I would also like them to share my Internet connection > without > having to obtain a second static IP address from my ISP. I am not a > network guru by any means, so I've been reading up on the subject, and > it seems there are several different ways this could be done. What I > am > thinking would be the simplest way is this: > > 1) Establish the LAN using private IP addresses and a hub. > > 2) Connect the hub to the cable modem. > > 3) Connect to the Internet directly from the Linux box, then configure > the Windoze box to use the Linux box as a proxy server so I can surf > the > web from the Windoze box (all my email etc. will go to the Linux box). > > Is this workable? Is it the simplest way to do what I want or is > there > a better way? > > Also, if I want to share my printer between the two machines, in you > guys' experience is it better/simpler to hang the printer off the > Windows box or the Linux box? > > Thanks, > Lee > > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Re: Comcast & Routing
I will soon have a similar situation... I have two computers at home. One is the one I'm using now which is currently dual boot RH9/Windows 98. It's connected to the Internet via cable modem (RCA) and has a static IP address. What I would like to do is install RH9 on a second computer, have a private LAN with the two machines, so that files/printers can be shared. I would also like them to share my Internet connection without having to obtain a second static IP address from my ISP. I am not a network guru by any means, so I've been reading up on the subject, and it seems there are several different ways this could be done. What I am thinking would be the simplest way is this: 1) Establish the LAN using private IP addresses and a hub. 2) Connect the hub to the cable modem. 3) Connect to the Internet directly from the Linux box, then configure the Windoze box to use the Linux box as a proxy server so I can surf the web from the Windoze box (all my email etc. will go to the Linux box). Is this workable? Is it the simplest way to do what I want or is there a better way? Also, if I want to share my printer between the two machines, in you guys' experience is it better/simpler to hang the printer off the Windows box or the Linux box? Thanks, Lee -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
RE: Comcast & Routing
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:redhat-list- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sevatio > Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 11:16 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Comcast & Routing > > > > Otto Haliburton wrote: > > > >>-Original Message- > >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:redhat-list- > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sevatio > >>Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 10:23 AM > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Subject: Comcast & Routing > >> > >>Hardware Scenario: 2 PCs connected to a hub/switch and the > hub/switch > >>is > >>connected to a Comcast cable modem that is then connected to the > >>Comcast > >>Cable Internet system. > >> > >>Main Question: Is it possible to route things in a manner that > enables > >>the 2 PCs to send data (via FTP or whatever) to each other at LAN > >>speed > >>(10/100mbps)? What happens now is that the data transfer is limited > >>to > >>Comcast's upstream limit (256kbps) because the packets are going out > >>to > >>the internet and coming back to the other PC. How would I set this > up > >>so that the packets to go directly through the hub/switch to the > other > >>PC resulting in a much faster transfer rate? > >> > >>Side note: I noticed that 2 PCs running Windows w/ Netbeui and file > >>sharing, the data transfer is that of LAN speed. > >> > >>So what is Netbeui & Windows File Sharing doing that is allowing the > >>LAN > >>speed connection between the 2 PCs and how can I get my 2 Linux > boxes > >>to > >> ftp to each other at LAN speed given the hardware scenario? > >> > >>Thanks, > >>Sevatio > >> > >> > >>-- > >>redhat-list mailing list > >>unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list > > > > > > Are you connected through a hub or a router. In any case if your > > computers are networked together, why do you need to use ftp at all. > > Setup the systems as nfs or if they are windows map the drives and > you > > should not need ftp because you can access the files directly. The > > answer to your question is routing. If you are using a hub then you > > will not have the problem as long as the two computers have a common > > protocol to use (windows are using netbeui). > > > > > > So, you're saying that it makes a difference whether I use a hub or a > router? I have both but I've noticed no difference between the two > because I still can't send packets directly from one pc to another > through the hub/switch via ftp. Also, the netbeui thing was an > experiment. I prefer not using netbeui and Windows. > > Thanks > > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list That's why because you have a hub and a router. You are using the router to have direct access to the internet from both system as well as probably to have a firewall also. I am not sure why you have the hub also. But here we go, everything (I think) that's being sent from any PC is being routed through the ISP and then getting routed back to the other computer because the router is dynamically assigning the IP addresses for each of the PC's, but it should be able route traffic between the PC's without using the ISP so you need to find out how to do that. If you were using the hub only then you would lose the firewall but everything that was going through the hub would be on the LAN. You would hook the ISP to the hub and the computers through the hub and then select one computer to connect to internet and all others would talk to the internet via proxy to that computer so that you don't have to pay for extra IP addresses. You will need a software firewall. There are some that are free. You should at that point be able to see all the computer on the LAN from each of the computers. Now I am sure that you can setup the router and hub together to stop routing through the ISP but you need to look at your documentation for the router to figure out how to do it. -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Re: Comcast & Routing
Otto Haliburton wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:redhat-list- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sevatio Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 10:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Comcast & Routing Hardware Scenario: 2 PCs connected to a hub/switch and the hub/switch is connected to a Comcast cable modem that is then connected to the Comcast Cable Internet system. Main Question: Is it possible to route things in a manner that enables the 2 PCs to send data (via FTP or whatever) to each other at LAN speed (10/100mbps)? What happens now is that the data transfer is limited to Comcast's upstream limit (256kbps) because the packets are going out to the internet and coming back to the other PC. How would I set this up so that the packets to go directly through the hub/switch to the other PC resulting in a much faster transfer rate? Side note: I noticed that 2 PCs running Windows w/ Netbeui and file sharing, the data transfer is that of LAN speed. So what is Netbeui & Windows File Sharing doing that is allowing the LAN speed connection between the 2 PCs and how can I get my 2 Linux boxes to ftp to each other at LAN speed given the hardware scenario? Thanks, Sevatio -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list Are you connected through a hub or a router. In any case if your computers are networked together, why do you need to use ftp at all. Setup the systems as nfs or if they are windows map the drives and you should not need ftp because you can access the files directly. The answer to your question is routing. If you are using a hub then you will not have the problem as long as the two computers have a common protocol to use (windows are using netbeui). So, you're saying that it makes a difference whether I use a hub or a router? I have both but I've noticed no difference between the two because I still can't send packets directly from one pc to another through the hub/switch via ftp. Also, the netbeui thing was an experiment. I prefer not using netbeui and Windows. Thanks -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
RE: Comcast & Routing
Sevatio wrote: > Hardware Scenario: 2 PCs connected to a hub/switch and the hub/switch > is connected to a Comcast cable modem that is then connected to the > Comcast Cable Internet system. > > Main Question: Is it possible to route things in a manner that enables > the 2 PCs to send data (via FTP or whatever) to each other at LAN > speed (10/100mbps)? What happens now is that the data transfer is > limited to Comcast's upstream limit (256kbps) because the packets are > going out to the internet and coming back to the other PC. How would > I set this up so that the packets to go directly through the > hub/switch to the other PC resulting in a much faster transfer rate? 1) please show your route tables. i.e. netstat -rn 2) Are the PC's that are connecting to Comacast PPPoE based? In other words... a /32 bit mask? > > Side note: I noticed that 2 PCs running Windows w/ Netbeui and file > sharing, the data transfer is that of LAN speed. NetBeui is a non routable protocol. > > So what is Netbeui & Windows File Sharing doing that is allowing the > LAN speed connection between the 2 PCs and how can I get my 2 Linux > boxes to ftp to each other at LAN speed given the hardware scenario? NetBeui does not ride on top of TCP/IP (like netbios). In fact, netbeui does not require TCP/IP to even be loaded. If your PC's connection to Comcast is PPPoE based, your only solution (that I'm aware of) is to install a firewall that makes the PPPoE connection to Comcast on a separate interface (eth0) and then configure your PC's to use an rfc1918 based network behind the firewall. i.e. eth0 of firewall connects to comcast, eth1 of firewall connects to hub or switch. Steve Cowles -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
RE: Comcast & Routing
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:redhat-list- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sevatio > Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 10:23 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Comcast & Routing > > Hardware Scenario: 2 PCs connected to a hub/switch and the hub/switch > is > connected to a Comcast cable modem that is then connected to the > Comcast > Cable Internet system. > > Main Question: Is it possible to route things in a manner that enables > the 2 PCs to send data (via FTP or whatever) to each other at LAN > speed > (10/100mbps)? What happens now is that the data transfer is limited > to > Comcast's upstream limit (256kbps) because the packets are going out > to > the internet and coming back to the other PC. How would I set this up > so that the packets to go directly through the hub/switch to the other > PC resulting in a much faster transfer rate? > > Side note: I noticed that 2 PCs running Windows w/ Netbeui and file > sharing, the data transfer is that of LAN speed. > > So what is Netbeui & Windows File Sharing doing that is allowing the > LAN > speed connection between the 2 PCs and how can I get my 2 Linux boxes > to > ftp to each other at LAN speed given the hardware scenario? > > Thanks, > Sevatio > > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list Are you connected through a hub or a router. In any case if your computers are networked together, why do you need to use ftp at all. Setup the systems as nfs or if they are windows map the drives and you should not need ftp because you can access the files directly. The answer to your question is routing. If you are using a hub then you will not have the problem as long as the two computers have a common protocol to use (windows are using netbeui). -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Re: Comcast & Routing
On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 08:22:52AM -0700, Sevatio wrote: > Hardware Scenario: 2 PCs connected to a hub/switch and the hub/switch is > connected to a Comcast cable modem that is then connected to the Comcast > Cable Internet system. > > Main Question: Is it possible to route things in a manner that enables > the 2 PCs to send data (via FTP or whatever) to each other at LAN speed > (10/100mbps)? Absolutely yes, LAN speeds is what most people who have this arrangement are getting. How did you get it setup so that all the packets have to go out to the "internet" instead of going directly to the "other PC"? Are your PC's running Linux? Have you run tcpdump to see what the packets are doing ? What happens now is that the data transfer is limited to > Comcast's upstream limit (256kbps) because the packets are going out to > the internet and coming back to the other PC. How would I set this up > so that the packets to go directly through the hub/switch to the other > PC resulting in a much faster transfer rate? > > Side note: I noticed that 2 PCs running Windows w/ Netbeui and file > sharing, the data transfer is that of LAN speed. > > So what is Netbeui & Windows File Sharing doing that is allowing the LAN > speed connection between the 2 PCs and how can I get my 2 Linux boxes to > ftp to each other at LAN speed given the hardware scenario? > > Thanks, > Sevatio > > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list > -- Jeff Kinz, Open-PC, Emergent Research, Hudson, MA. [EMAIL PROTECTED] copyright 2003. Use is restricted. Any use is an acceptance of the offer at http://www.kinz.org/policy.html. Don't forget to change your password often. -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Comcast & Routing
Hardware Scenario: 2 PCs connected to a hub/switch and the hub/switch is connected to a Comcast cable modem that is then connected to the Comcast Cable Internet system. Main Question: Is it possible to route things in a manner that enables the 2 PCs to send data (via FTP or whatever) to each other at LAN speed (10/100mbps)? What happens now is that the data transfer is limited to Comcast's upstream limit (256kbps) because the packets are going out to the internet and coming back to the other PC. How would I set this up so that the packets to go directly through the hub/switch to the other PC resulting in a much faster transfer rate? Side note: I noticed that 2 PCs running Windows w/ Netbeui and file sharing, the data transfer is that of LAN speed. So what is Netbeui & Windows File Sharing doing that is allowing the LAN speed connection between the 2 PCs and how can I get my 2 Linux boxes to ftp to each other at LAN speed given the hardware scenario? Thanks, Sevatio -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
