WANT TO SHARE YOUR BROAD BAND CONNECTION? read this.

[spidey07]

Hey fellas, sorry for yelling but there seems to be a huge number of folks who have the need to share their broadband internet connection with other home computers. Now I know one answer does not fit all but there really are only two options:

1) Use network appliance (linksys, netgear, sonicwall, about 4 dozen others)
2) Use software (ICS, FRESCO, et al)

Here's where hopefully the confusion can end:
1) The job of reformatting frames and shipping them to their intended destinations is purely upto "the network" meaning don't have hosts (linux, MS, netware, home PC) do the job of "the network" Trying to make operating systems act like network gear really does not make any sense.
2) WAY too many limitations arise when you ask software running on a PC to perform "the networks" job: increased proc utilization, problems with windows browsing (ie "i can't see my other computer&quot, god awfull complicated network confiruration, "how do I run a web server from home", I can't get VPN to work thru ICS.
3) But just load FREESCO and your problems solved! Come on! Do you really want to run another computer just to do the job of a piece of network gear? Think about the heat, power that are being used. Its only a hundred bucks for a hardware router, somebody figure out the ROI as far as energy cost is concerned.
4) A soho router is inherently more secure via NAT and inspection. with ICS or other software based products you are relying entirely on the security of the OS (which with MS is a bad idea, no matter which product you choose)
5) This is based solely on home networks. bigger ones simply need more robust network gear. leave the host out of it.
6) Making your typical home user go through protocol bindings (use ip for internet, use netbeui for file/print sharing) for security is simply absurd. Yeah it works but makes for a network that is totally more complicated than it needs to be.

So the most acceptable answer to "how do I share my internet connection" is simply:
Buy a router, plug it in, follow the directions.

my .02
spidey

ps - i'll get flamed for this but I'll stick to my guns. "The Network" is responsible for shipping/formatting/addressing frames. Hosts are there to ship them to "The Network". Let the network handle all that crap and all your hosts have to do is serve up apps. much simpler.

 

[Xanathar]

I fully support this position also Spidey.

Not to mention the "Routers" also provide DHCP services, on both ends, to make networking for newbies even easier.

 

[Eug]

So what's your take on TCP/IP in the home network (behind a home gateway), vs. something like Netbeui, for extra "safety"?

 

[Russ]

Spidey,

You are absolutely on-target. I'll even add a generic network diagram to help illuminate your point. Now, what could be simpler to setup then that?

NOTE: Above is a Word document.

Russ, NCNE

 

[spidey07]

EUG:

I see no reason to run netbeui if you have a nat/gateway (read home router). The home router will give your home PCs absolute security from attacks if you are using NAT. It is for just this reason that I'm such an advocate of my first post. I am exrememly paranoid when it comes to security (because when i was at school at Purdue my pastimes included breaking into poorly secured systems).

Now if you don't have some sort of NAT or packet inspection device between your host and the internet then by all means use netbeui for file/print. but again this makes for a complicated setup.

Bottom line: You really shouldn't have your host totally exposed to the internet. Remember that your firewall software is running on your OS. There are many ways around these software firewalls especially if a system has already been compromised.

the year is 2001. The only protocol is IP.

<edit> 'bout the comment &quot;totally secured behind NAT router&quot;. That is not entirely true, however TCP hijacking is very difficult and requires access to substancial resources AND cannot be performed by these script kiddies out there. (ps don't scan me, I'm playin games later and don't want my ping to suffer)

pss - REALLY don't scan me. I read packet traces for a living and have reverse path checking.

 

[Ladi]

AMEN!

While a software solution may be &quot;cheaper&quot; because &quot;whel, I already have this old PC lying around needing something to do&quot; -- there's always the hassle of actually setting it up (especially in the case of *nix newbies who want to do ipchains because they heard it was really l33t *shudder*), not to mention that every component is failable (let's forget about energy costs for now and assume this is a bare PC without even a dedicated monitor) and you have to leave a computer on all the time. Or even if a software solution is chosen because &quot;I can run this off my existing computer with just an extra NIC and a crossover cable&quot; makes for hassles in when computer can be turned off, rebooted, etc; cheaper isn't always better.

A little cheapie cable/dsl router is easy to set up (1 poster-sized page of bright pictures and large text on the Linksys my parents just bought) and practically foolproof. Seriously...take a barely-Windows-literate person and what kind of solution do you want to give them? Something that's easy to plug in using regular cables and works just about instantly. There're worse things in life from the informal tech support line for friends&amp;family standpoint. It costs less in time and hassle for *everyone* in the long run.

~Ladi

 

[RiceDiGiZ]

LOL

 

[JACKHAMMER]

Although I tend to agree with you guys, setting up my old 486 box w/ IP masqing was a heluva lot cheaper than buying a hardware solution. I agree that a router is easier and more fool proof - but hey software solutions are FREE!

 

[Russ]

Yes, software solutions are free, but time is not. Now, if you have some to use that's fine. But, I'd rather slap in a hardware solution and move on to the next project.

Russ, NCNE

 

[spidey07]

please keep in mind this by no means trolling.

I'm trying to contribute to everybody that keeps struggling with the same goal.

I just keep seeing so many &quot;WAY TOO COMPLICATED&quot; answers to this basic question. I really can't think of a scenario where a home router will not do what is needed. I run multiplayer games, napster, icq, aol instant messenger, and just about everything without a problem.

 

[warlord]

I used pmfirewall for my linux box, and shut off all the unused programs. I get the same results on a probe search at grc.com as does my friend who has linksys router. Now I take the results with a grain of salt, but both seem pretty secure.

besides, setting up my linux box was a great way to get started with linux. I completly agree with not using an windows based gateway though.

 

[JackMDS]

If you follow the posting on this forum, it seems that most people who use ?software solution?, use a second NIC, and need to buy cables.

They seem to &quot;forget&quot; about the crossover, and get stuck with an extra cable.

Most Cable/Router boxes come with two CAT5 cables(you save on buying two cables).

Two Cables and NIC.

For some it is only $20, for the &quot;Brand Name Lovers&quot; (3com NIC + CAT10!), it can get to $50.

Guys like warlord do not post the questions that spidey07 refer to.

 

[StoneG]

a hardware solution is the best choice but not for everyone, for example i have an isdn serial modem, and here in M&eacute;xico is almost imposible to get an ISDN lan modem (the only computer store i've founded where i can buy it doesn't have it in stock rigth now, and it's about ¡800 bucks!, thats to much for me, i can build another windows system just to run ICS with that much money) , also freesco doesn't seem to support my modem so what else could i do, if not to use ICS or another software solution for windows?

 

[Nosferatu]

Is there really such thing as Cat 10?

 

[midnightrat]

Awesome post spidey, which i totally agree with but i have to mention that some people do the cheap pc and software just as an experiment/learning experience. As soon as i get my dsl installed i'll playing around with freesco and linux but once it's setup and i have a resonable understanding i'll be picking up one of those linksys router switchs.

 

[spidey07]

All true statements in support of a linux box. Heck, i'd like to play around with it myself. I'd still be wary of the security issues of an open OS such as linux sitting bare on the internet unless you really know what you're doing.

Is there a CAT10 cable? not really, but RUSS has a picture of one somewhere. Cat6 isn't event past draft stage (translate, don't buy cat6 cable)

cheers!

 

[spidey07]

share that internet connection! Host your own servers! Have zero problems with &quot;can't see my computer&quot;! Abide by networking best practices!!!!! Get that broadband router!!! cheaper than a stick of ram and WAY less headache!!!!

 

[Edski]

WOOOOHOOOOOO

Spidey, if you ever come to Denver, I will buy you a whole lot of micro brews. I got tired of explaining the reasons to people and quit trying to convince them of what you said. They will learn in the long run. My hats off to you.

 

[Russ]

Nosferatu,

Sure there's Cat10. Buy.com has it in stock:

http://www.buy.com&amp;category=networking@3480017549/cat10/cat10.html

It's damned expensive, though.

Russ, NCNE

 

[linuxboy]

wait a second...

that's not buy.com !!!

and I aready ordered 40,000 pieces

AAAAAAAAHHH

 

[IJump]

One other little tidbit to support the &quot;go with the router&quot; argument. I have seen several of the free masquerade programs that aren't friendly with all software. The hardware designed to do the &quot;network's&quot; job usually has much better performance and compatability with a wider range of software. Not all masquerade/connection sharing programs are bad, the hardware just does it better.

 

[ChicagoMaroon]

What kind of performance do you guys get with TCP/IP vs. NetBeui on your internal LANs? On my fast ethernet switched network, NetBeui kicks the crap out of TCP/IP in sustained throughput.

 

[zman6911]

While I agree a hardware solution is the easiest, and probably the best way to go for most people, I feel that the experience of setting a computer up to handle network services can be a great experience. Sure anyone can plug a router in and get it to work, but taking the time to configure and troubleshoot a software solution can be a fulfilling. I do not feel there is a suitable windows solution, so if one is would like to setup a software based router, I advise that person to make it a Linux/BSD solution. I am running an OpenBSD box right now myself. It handles NAT and DHCP for my home. A nice thing about setting a router up yourself is you have total control. You can setup more services if need be, like http, ftp, telnet, ssh, DNS, and others. However, I do not condone running those services on a software router due to security risks (with SSH2 being a notable exception), but with a proper firewall ruleset anything is possible . With that said, for 90% of the people out there who want their network to just &quot;work,&quot; a hardware router is definately the way to go. It is no hassle and it does what it was designed to do well. For people who are looking for some experiencing setting up a networks and want to know how it works, then try setting a computer up with a *Nix solution and take a look at some HowTo's. Lemme tell you, its just a good feeling when you get a solution you setup yourself working.

Edit: I almost forgot!!! My OpenBSD box also does something NO router can. It cracks RC5 ...

 

[osage]

Is this device all that I will need to share my cable connection on 2 PCs in my house? Cheap router
LMK if this is what I need, before I order

 

[Need4Speed]

running win2k server with RRAS can do everyhting a router can do...and more...because thats what it is supposed to do. It can also do DHCP on both ends and NAT.