Re: using a switch rather than router
- From: DLR <news22@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 08:53:37 -0500
$Bill wrote:
Henry wrote:Bit Twister <BitTwister@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:4 computers connected to switch connected to cable modem, user pays for 4 ip addresses because switch is not NATing computers.
Not at all. The software that is doing the IP 'routing' takes care of the NAT too. Works a treat, too. See, for example
http://www.sustworks.com/site/prod_ipnrx_overview.html
Why would you pay $100 for software that sucks up your CPU and forces you to keep that PC on all the time to service your other PCs (not that that's that big a deal in a lot of cases) when you can get a dedicated router for half the price or less to do the job that uses minuscule power and offloads your CPU and can even handle wireless for you and eliminate the need for another switch ?
Just some context. Peter of Sustainable Softworks has had these product going back for years. And they are a great suite of products. Back in the early days of the mass Internet he gave us a way to share our dial up or broadband connection across multiple computers. It was a great solution and it worked great. I did it for myself and for others. And yes you could put a switch on a broadband modem and have a computer with a single Ethernet port act as a router. But even Peter would tell you that this is not the best way to go these days. I'm guessing he'd tell you it is the last choice these days all other things being equal. And yet there are times when this can be a good thing to be able to do inside a fire walled office. But his "toolkit" has more to it that just Internet sharing. I've used his stuff for years but no longer have anyone setup with his router. But I still know of some folks who did as of a few months ago. They had Mac OS 9 boxes with DUAL Ethernet ports that had been running as routers for years and only changed to a "router in a box" when something new came up.
Plus these examples of Sustainable Softworks are not broadly applicable. These are Mac products. And Mac OS 9 especially, and OS X in general are a just a wee bit less likely to suffer a successful attack from the outside than any windows variant out there.
But Henry (I think he's the one arguing against us) wants us to tell the original fellow he can do it and not mention why it's a very bad idea these days. Sorry. I'll not do that.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: using a switch rather than router
- From: Warren
- Re: using a switch rather than router
- References:
- using a switch rather than router
- From: BigJim
- Re: using a switch rather than router
- From: DLR
- Re: using a switch rather than router
- From: Bit Twister
- Re: using a switch rather than router
- From: $Bill
- using a switch rather than router
- Prev by Date: Re: which wireless do you like linksys, netgear or dlink
- Next by Date: Re: using a switch rather than router
- Previous by thread: Re: using a switch rather than router
- Next by thread: Re: using a switch rather than router
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
