finally considering wireless

[tai4ji2x]

heh, i've avoided migrating to wireless for the longest time, mainly because until recently i never really had the habit of using my laptop as a true "mobile" computer. also, i subscribe to my comcast cable service with the additional multiple-IP block service, so i've never had to bother with routers and using NAT.

so i'm wondering, how i would go about setting up a WAN that doesn't use NAT? ie, what would be the wireless equivalent to my ethernet switch/hub which i use to "share" (with publicly distinct, non-192.x.x.x IP's, as opposed to using a NAT router) my broadband internet?

 

[RebateMonger]

You really ought to consider using a router (and NAT) anyway. It's a great security feature and will make networking (including wireless) a breeze.

Without NAT, the only way you are going to talk between your PCs is to either set up a VPN between them (try Hamachi) or open up their filesharing ports to the Internet (not a great idea nowadays).

 

[tai4ji2x]

well, for windows filesharing, i always just binded it to IPX only, and disabled filesharing over TCP/IP. (see http://www.grc.com/su-bondage.htm)

 

[nweaver]

just configure a router with a 192.168 address, turn off DHCP, setup the wireless how you want, and plug the cable modem into a LAN port. Now it's a simple AP, and now anyone who can crack your wireless security gets a live IP....

user a nat router, unless there is a distinct reason not to. It's got many advantages.

 

[ktwebb]

Yep, just use an AP. If you want to understand it as analogy, an Access Point is a wireless hub. So if you understand the concept of a hub or switch then adding an AP is the exact same thing. It just serves wireless clients via RF vs cabling and copper.

I would join in and say get a router. Very few reasons not to since they are dirt cheap these days.

 

[JackMDS]

Hmm... and what are your specific gains by not using NAT?

In any case Access Points are more expensive than Wireless Cable/DSL Routers.

So buy a Wireless Router and use it as an Access Point (Using a Wireless Cable/DSL Router as a Switch with an Access Point ).

By doing so you would save money and would be able to experiment with both forms and see what works better.

Wireless What Should I Get?

:sun:

 

[tai4ji2x]

yeah, i guess i don't gain all that much anymore these days from not using NAT. just some convenience, at the cost of some security, i think. many years back it seemed like many apps required a lot more tinkering to get it to work behind a router, but most everything these days i suppose has overcome this. although perhaps i'm still just a lazy bum who just doesn't want to deal with port forwarding and whatnot in the first place, secuirty be damned, lol.

btw, thanks for that ezlan site, jackmds - it looks really helpful.