Slashdot Mirror
Motorola Introduces Home Cable Modem/Router
Anonymous Coward writes: "Check this out! Motorola has a cable modem that also supports Ethernet, USB AND HomePNA! The modem doubles as a NAT, firewall and dhcp server -- Awesome!" Cable modems aren't new, but it seems that both service providers and manufacturers are finally catching the idea that TOS agreements are not about to head off the wave of home networking. Products like this will make the idea of households paying per-connection fees even more laughable.
I want one! One important question would be whether the modem requires Moto's own service or whether other cable service providers will allow use of this modem in their service. It would suck to only be able to get this kinda thing in certain areas.
What does TOS stand for?
The bastards at cablevision went ahead and wired all of NY state, but didn't bother with Bergen County nj 25 minutes outside of nyc.......
The path to hell is paved with least resistance.
Hopefully motorola will ship these with
no system-wide default (or easily guessable)
passwords, and with spoofing protection outbound.
The trend toward faster and faster network
connections sold as "appliances" puts a lot more
responsibility on the manufacturer to make sure
default configurations are suitable for users,
and won't contribute to DDoS, etc.
I would love to have this new modem!! It would free up a decent computer that I have been using for NAT and DHCP.
But what about the cable providers? They love to charge extra for additional IP addresses. It doesn't seem like they would like this too much.
Also, will this new modem be compatible with all of the current HFC cable services? If so, can you choose to use this with your internet access like you can with you TV converter? The guys from Comcast who came to install our modem and line told us we had to use the RCA or the Motorola that they provide.
I think cable modem service TOS should be less restrictive....no servers? what about playing network quake or halflife? With this new device, what about running your own http/ftp/ssh/telnet servers? Service in Lewisville, TX by @Home really sucks, probaly because of the service techs or the service itself.
the article states that it is capable of 40mbps streams down, but also, it has a usb connector... Is not the usb throughput maximum near 10 mbps ? wow, doesn't take a genious to figure out that usb really sucks in this case
Have you tried Powdermilk Biscuits?
My, they're tasty, and expeditious...
thank you.
I have a DSL "modem" that uses NAT. It's kind of nice that I can hook up multiple computers to the internet at home, but I run into other problems. It is a pain trying to log onto IRC because identd does not get through. Also, I can't really run any kind of server at home and expect it to work because NAT won't let anything through, and I think even if I tinkered with the tables in the modem, the IP address to the outside world is dynamic. I think with uswest.net, if I want to have a static IP and all that, I will have to order business-level service ($$$) instead of home luser service.
I'm posting this as a service, so you can get it even if the site gets slashdotted. Enjoy :)
/PRNewswire/ -- Motorola Inc. (NYSE: MOT - news) Broadband Communications Sector today announced that Cable Television Laboratories, Inc. (CableLabs®) has certified two additional Motorola DOCSIS modems -- the Motorola cable modem DM 100 and the PL 100 multi-user cable modem. The PL 100 certification marks the first CableLabs® Certified(TM) home-networking modem.
Thursday March 9, 3:23 pm Eastern Time
Company Press Release
SOURCE: Motorola Inc.
Motorola Receives CableLabs(R) Certification(TM) on Its DM 100 and PL 100 Cable Modems - The Motorola PL 100 Multi-User Modem Becomes the Industry's First Certified Modem to Offer a HomePNA Network Gateway
Recognition Also Marks the Third and Fourth Cablelabs Certifications For Motorola, Further Demonstrating Its Leadership in Providing DOCSIS-Based Modems
HORSHAM, Pa., March 9
The DM 100 and PL 100 also become the third and fourth Motorola cable modems to receive CableLabs® Certification(TM). CableLabs certified the Motorola SURFboard SB2100 cable modem in May 1999 and Motorola's DOCSIS 1.1- based SB3100 in December 1999.
CableLabs Certification means that the DM 100 and PL 100 modems have completed an extensive series of interoperability tests. It also recognizes the modems' compliance with Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification (DOCSIS) 1.0-based headends and operation support systems (OSS) equipment.
``CableLabs is very pleased to certify Motorola's latest DOCSIS cable modems -- the DM 100 and the PL 100, our first home-networking modem. We value Motorola's commitment to our interoperable cable modem initiative and look forward to working with them on developing a new interoperable network that will help to drive industry-wide cable modem deployment,'' said Dr. Richard R. Green, CableLabs President and CEO.
``Motorola is pleased to have obtained two additional DOCSIS 1.0 certifications from CableLabs and the DOCSIS certification board. And we're proud to be delivering the industry's first CableLabs Certified home- networking modem -- the Motorola PL 100,'' said Dan Moloney, Senior VP and General Manager of Motorola's IP Network Systems business unit. ``These important certifications further validate our ongoing commitment to developing high-performance broadband equipment for the cable industry.''
About the DM 100
The Motorola cable modem DM 100 delivers stable and reliable transmission in addition to interoperability, based on years of refinement in hybrid fiber coax (HFC) data engineering and field-proven experience. The DM 100 receives 64/256 QAM signals from the Cable Modem Termination System (CMTS) (supporting throughputs up to 40 Mbps) and transmits QPSK/16 QAM signals upstream (supporting throughputs up to 10 Mbps). With approvals from Microsoft® Windows® Hardware Qualification Labs (WHQL) and the USB Organization, the DM 100 also offers superior ease of use and plug-and-play installation.
According to the industry analyst firm Kinetic Strategies, the number of North American cable modem users is predicted to grow from 1.8 million in 1999 to 15.9 million in 2003. The availability of a DOCSIS cable modem that employs a USB interface is expected to facilitate the broad-based consumer adoption of cable modems.
About the PL 100
The Motorola PL 100 multi-user cable modem provides DOCSIS capability along with the ease of Internet sharing and home-area networking over ordinary telephone wire. The modem provides broadband Internet access over hybrid fiber coax (HFC) and distributes it to multiple devices in the home through Ethernet, USB, and Home Phone Networking Alliance (HomePNA) ports, which can be active simultaneously. This capability gives the user maximum flexibility in installation and set-up. Internet sharing is enabled through a Motorola- developed Network Address Translation (NAT) and DHCP server, which reside in the modem. The modem's software also delivers enhanced security with a firewall.
Home area networking is enabled with HomePNA technology. The PL 100's built-in HomePNA 2.0 interface allows data to move at up to 10 million bits per second (Mpbs) over ordinary household telephone wire, without interfering with normal telephone operation. HomePNA connectivity and Motorola's configuration software provide a fully functioning network. In addition to sharing Internet access and e-mail, users can share printers, scanners and other devices; exchange data files; and play interactive games.
The DM 100 and PL 100 are part of Motorola's industry-leading line of cable modems. Other modems in the line include the CyberSUFR and CyberSUFR Wave CDLP modems, the AL 200 wireless multi-user modem, and the SURFboard family of DOCSIS-based RF-return cable modems.
Released by CableLabs in March 1997, DOCSIS calls for the interoperability of cable modems and associated networks manufactured by different suppliers. Interoperability speeds time to market by reducing risk for equipment purchasers and consumers and creates economies of scale for broadband network operators by creating multiple product sources.
Motorola, Inc. (NYSE: MOT - news) is a global leader in providing integrated communications solutions and embedded electronic solutions. These include:
Software-enhanced wireless telephone, two-way radio, messaging and satellite communications products and systems, as well as networking and Internet-access products, for consumers, network operators, and commercial, government and industrial customers.
Digital and analog systems and set-top terminals for broadband cable television operators.
Embedded semiconductor solutions for customers in the networking and computing, transportation, wireless communications and imaging and entertainment industries.
Embedded electronic systems for automotive, communications, imaging, manufacturing systems, computer, consumer and industrial markets.
Sales in 1999 were $30.9 billion.
For more information, visit us on the Web at www.motorola.com.
Motorola® is a registered trademark of Motorola Inc.
The terms ``CableLabs Certified'' or ``Certified by CableLabs'' are certification marks of Cable Television Laboratories, Inc. and cannot be used without authorization of Cable Television Laboratories, Inc.
Microsoft and Windows are trademarks or registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation.
All other product or company names may be trademarks of their respective owners.
SOURCE: Motorola Inc.
If service vender provide NAT/Firewall box with service as an integrated portion of DSL/Cable connection box, they can block connection to some port claiming to protect consumer by preconfiguring these box.
Result will be no server function accesible from outside. No more personal web server, ssh into your home machine, etc.
I would rather my Linux do those functions in my way.
-----------
My FlowPoint 144 DSL router does NAT and firewall already. And to that person who's having trouble with identd: enable access on port 113 and use fakeident (search for it on freshmeat).
However, I have not been able to access its features to get it set up for home newtorking. I think this is related to the special trip the phone company people took to my house in order to "configure" the box before I could touch it.
Anyone had any luck setting up real home networking in this kind of environment? Will these same problems plague the new cool stuff coming out of Motorola?
Want to work at Transmeta? Hedgefund.net? Priceline?
Can your IM do this?
This is all fine and dandy, but what I want to know is COST? How many body parts do I have to remove to get one of these things? Will it work in replace of my Terayon modem for @Home service? etc. etc. etc.
-- DuckWing
I currently have a Motorola CYBERSUFR cable modem with a Linux box attached doing masquerading and firewalling for my home LAN, and have had nothing but praise for it (and had heard about something like this coming out).   But my concern deals with putting a router in a box like this...   who will be expected to maintain it?   The ISP?   I can't picture Joe Q. User trying to configure a router box if it loses it's little mind.   And imagine the average user base of a cable modem provider (thousands) and the number of staff to try to support them and some new router box (very few).
I also have concern regarding the amount of DDoS that could occur when you put something like that out there...   Imagine what a cracker could do to this thing....
-- Win2k: "It's not so much that it's only 65,000 bugs, it's just that they stopped at 65,535 to prevent an overflow."
are out there.. Linksys has the EtherFast DSL/Cable Router which has a built in 10/100 switch, does NAT, DHCP, port forwarding and can login to PPPoE for about $150
t =befsr41
t 311
http://www.linksys.com/scripts/features.asp?par
Netgear has a similar product, the RT311
http://www.netgear.com/products/routers.shtml#r
http://www.s4biturbo.com/
Nortel Networks has already been pushing this envelope with their 1 meg modem. Nice to see the rest of the market frantically trying to play catchup before Nortel finally blows them all away with fibre to your door. They're already the leading supplier of optical gigabit networks, and the ONLY company selling terabit networks. These modems are pretty piddly.
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
3Com is in the process of finalizing a "Dual Link" modem that does VPN, PPPoE, Bridging, NAT, USB/Ethernet bridging, and some very cool other features.... it has console access (at least in betas... i bet they will keep it)
... now I don't need to go buy a NIC for my laptop :)
You get full control via console or you can access it remotely... it has a built in web config console too.
It kicks my Alcatel 1000 ADSL modem's butt.... I definately recommend waiting for 3Com to release these things publically.
Its awsome to bridge USB and Ethernet networks
Ever need an online dictionary?
They also make you say you won't hook up a second TV without paying for it in those terms-of-service agreements. That's insane. They're providing a signal. I say what you do with that signal is your business as long as you don't sell or share it with a household that isn't paying for it. Would they have me pay extra if a friend of mine comes over to watch TV? He's not paying for it, but he's watching it.
There's some more money to be made! Don't worry about pissing off your customers. Just shake 'em down for some more dough.
Same thing with internet access. You're paying for a pipeline through which you can move data. You only get so much bandwidth. Whose business is it what you do with that bandwidth; whether one machine uses it, or if its split between two, or three, or fifty machines.
If the cable companies had any kind of sense at all, they would be trying to cater to our needs as much as possible. High-bandwidth access is going to be a very, very, very big business, and they should try to garner a loyal following, rather than annoying and extorting customers.
While Motorola's efforts are commendable, I just can't trust my home network to a "burned-in-the-rom" solution. There's too much going on with the script kiddies and their "splotz" - I need a solution I can adapt over time.
Personally my money is on Coyote Linux. It runs on a cheap 486 and is easy to configure!
****
"I'd never want to join a club that would have me as a member" - G. Marx
This product isn't all that new of an idea. Similar products by Cisco and Lucent/Ascend are already available for xDSL. The cable connection does offer a new twist to the home users, however, it will depend on the rules of the cable company as to which functions the users will be allowed to set. Something else to remember is that the average home user will not be able to pull this device out of the box and provision it. Although a web based interface may help, it will be the jobs of the truck roll comany to configure it, and how knowlegable their tech are (not very) will determine the security of the connection. This may open up opportunities for technical savy folks like us /.ers to make a couple of extra bucks on the side by doing security checks on these connections, and making changes as needed. As for NAT and firewall services, I would venture to say that these will be locked out by the provider, so that you do have to pay for each computer connected to it. But that is just my $0.02. -MerkuryZ
perl -e "print(pack('H37','4d65726b7572795a40676e7572642e6e6574'))"
Umm, have you checked out Netopia? $500 gets you a SDSL R7100 router which does NAT, Firewalling, DHCP, BootP... They also have these things for IDSL(Sucks) and ADSL. Mine has two WAN ports, meaning I could get 3MB for the cost of two lines. DSL doesn't have the uptime a T1 had. Telcos don't dispatch for DSL outages until weekdays, and even then response is REALLY slow.
Only thing is that Netopias use this whole Menu based deal which is crap compared to a Cisco. If you're really cool you can get a R7100 CSU DSU to hook up to your Cosco via V.35 adapter and even use DSL as a cheap backup line for your T1.
Motivation is hard to come by, but that's what caffeine is for.
Because I don't see how a 1mm compares with a cable modem which can act as a gateway and support multiple network protacols
Besides, my Cisco 675 DSL router already does most of this... :b
--
--
fat lenny's gonna lick your brain today.
The last thing I want is a behind-the-firewall 10 Mbps network link on my phone line going outside the house.
Who needs a Tempest box to tap you when your whole net is on your phone line?
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
The neat thing about this one is that the cable modem is built in. If you want info on standalone devices, may I suggest these sites:
http://www.cablemodeminfo.com
http://www.timhiggins.com
Whoever moderated the parent is an absolute idiot. It's not a troll. Do you even have the SLIGHEST clue what Troll is? Guess not.
It's offtopic.
"Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
And if you don't believe me check out the forums on http://www.dslreports.com, which also has help for those of you struggling with DSL provider policies.
They tell you to plug it into you computer (with the included NIC and crossover cable) or into a hub with a bunch of computers. If you are using Wintel, that's all you need to do (there is no maintenance).
You need to know how to use telnet and know that the router picks 10.0.0.1 as its address to fsck with stuff.
They're also reluctant to give you a static IP (which is why I'm switching)...
The "prosumer" (gawd I hate that word) ISPs will make you switch your router to bridging mode, so that it simulates having your LAN plugged into a big fat hub with everyone else's DSL connection. In that case there is some assembly required (I'll be using an OpenBSD firewall/NAT/web server box as soon as USWest switches over the connection).
With any luck those that don't know what they're doing won't need to.
I wish we would stop call these "modems". It's a router, not a modem. Modem == "Modulator Demodulator", and there is nothing being modulated (i.e., converted into sound) over a cable connection.
--
It's cool to see that the solutions go from only hardware to mostly software.
GollyGee Blocks -- 3D creativity software for kids.
The only reason they charge extra per connection is because of the extra ip addresses. That is what is so valuable. They couldn't care less if you had something like this. In fact, my cable provider (Road Runner), offers instructions on how to use the Win98 internet sharing instead of paying the extra 10 bucks a month.
You better hope there is no CISCO or other gear between X and you.
If you are using Wintel, that's all you need to do (there is no maintenance).
;-)   Now I don't know nuthin' about Motorola's EPROMs but I do know some 3COMs that tend to lose their little minds (as I noted previously) meaning that all that stuff programmed into them (routing paths, helpers, etc) go bye bye.   Meaning maintenance.   Plus router software versions change constantly, so you need to keep that updated AND it would be prudent that all your router boxes on the same net have the same software version.   Add to all this the fact that there is a severe shortage of WAN "experts" amongst the ISPs and I can see big problems ahead if this thing gets out there en masse.
Because of stuff like configuration wipes that can occur, I miss having routers with some kind of floppy or even flash card (although you introduce the possibility of a "mechanical" failure as opposed to having a memory-based configuration).
And I still have the concern about DDoSing because other than having those zombie Linux boxes out there, the latest DDoS attacks were magnified by misconfigured routers.
-- Win2k: "It's not so much that it's only 65,000 bugs, it's just that they stopped at 65,535 to prevent an overflow."
I don't know about the *BSD's, but on linux I used oidentd to handle ident requests behind a masqueraded connection.
Oh, and as far as setting up a server on one of the boxes behind my masq box, I just use ipmasqadm. It suports port forwarding and the like. For instance, I run a q3 and ftp server on my main linux machine behind my masq box. Hope this helps.
I already share a cable connection (without my provider's knowledge or consent) with three other machines. I am using a little card-deck sized box from UMAX. I bought their Ugate Plus and had no problems setting it up at all. I have been using it since August of '99. It does DHCP, but allows static addesses too. It also acts as a firewall. The only other thing you need is a hub in order to plug all the other machines into. This is a solution I definitely recommend.
By the way, I did not need any extra IPs from my cable provider, as this thing subnets the one IP that your provider gives you.
While this appears to be a nice product on the surface a number of issues remain both with the modem/router and with cable i-net access. As already mentioned if the nat's ports are non user configurable then what good is the nat to an advanced user? Particularly if it blocks functionality that some of us would prefer to have. The other major issue is cable access itself. A standard cable modem runs to a node which usually consists of a t1. In theory that node serves 10 customers who all have good bandwidth. A number of issues crop up here. A t1 costs approx 600-1000 a month, less for the isp, each cable user pays around 40-50 a month, which means that cable access on the surface means they are operating at a loss on a month to month basis. This means that to break a profit they need to overload their nodes which really hurts the user's access. Since the nodes run on an atm cloud style system, if one node gets overloaded and traffic spreads to other nodes, you can overload a whole network of these things. A buddy of mine was pinging 3000 minimum outside his node as a result of a total clusterfsck of his area. As if @home gives a damn, they just kept pullin in more customers. Back to topic, a nice modem cant fix the isps load issues, cable is still insecure and the bandwidth aint guaranteed, a fancy nat and router cant fix that.
"Arrogance and Stupidity all in the same package. How efficient of you." - Londo Mollari, Babylon 5.
Didn't I say that things like MS packing in mini web servers, and web phones, and other things like routers, or server software to let you turn lights and appliances on and off via the net, and of course net gaming (Quake, Unreal, etc.) would *FORCE* the ISPs to drop their rigid draconian stance against servers of any kind? Servers are not evil. Servers do not "suck up" bandwidth as ISPs would have us believe. The real reason they hate servers is that it lets peon user scum compete right back with the ISPs own services (web hosting, selling extra email addresses, ftp hosting, etc.) How dare we, On the other hand, most high speed ISP already have bandwidth limits after which steep fer MB charges apply. So long as I'm under my limit, why should they care if I'm suing to run my personal low volume web/ftp/ssh server? My server/gateway machine probably only uses ~3GB xfer per month up and download (that's server + my own net usage). Would they be happier if I just DL'd the max 15GB of pr0n every month, but ran no servers?
Hey, overkill never hurt anybody :)
But seriously, you are right.
great, yet ANOTHER linux dist. fragmentation is HURTING linux. there is next to no need for anything other than debian, redhat, and corel. also, all these redhat based dists have little added value. their added value doesn't justify spliting.
Actually, they probably would be happier. I'm sure that they designate tons of download bandwidth to you, and then restrict the upload so that they can use the bandwidth for other income (ie web/ftp hosting).
There is a caveat if you are a quake player.
I recently bought a Linksys 4 port dsl/cable router/switch and I'm very happy with it overall. The only problem that I've had so far is that connecting multiple clients from behind the router to a quake server on the internet drops the connection of both computers. Apparently quake sees that 2 clients are connecting from the same IP (as the NAT server makes it look like both are from the same location) and get's messed up. It seems like there has to be a 1 to 1 correlation between quake clients and IP numbers as seen by the server. From what I've heard, Unreal Tournament doesn't suffer from this limitation and allows multiple clients to connect from the same IP.
If anyone knows a way around this, let me know!
I'm beta-testing a Linux-based (the ColdFire uC port) NAT firewall/router/DHCP server in a box the size of a network hub (no disk, no fan; high MTBF maketh glad.) It's called a NETtel and it's made by a small company in Australia called Moreton Bay (http://www.moretonbay.com). I am quite impressed with this device (one of these appeared on Slashdot a few months ago; one of their engineers tacked a DAC onto it and turned it into an MP3 player -- a neat hack.)
The NETtel is small, VERY user-configurable via built-in HTTP interface (no hidden Big Brother shit here), resists my attempts to hack into it from the 'Net, and works really well in general. 'Tis worth checking out.
(And NO, I do NOT get anything out of saying this; I genuinely LIKE the gadget, and I hope they do well with it.)
"My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
What options are available for getting around them? When will cable companies realize that TOS agreements aren't going to stop ppl from running Napster or iMesh or any other service? I'm not saying we should be getting more than we pay for but...why the hell are they forcing asymetric service on us? If there is the backbone bandwidth to suppport 500KBps downloads, why the hell do they cap uploads at 16Kbps? There seem to be two major cable modem brands...the Lantastic Surfboard (ugh) and the Motorola Cybersurfer (double ugh). I've seen several people passing around a file that updates the BIOS on the Lantastic brand to remove the cap (upload speeds from 50Kbps to 100Kpbs) but so far nothing from the Motorola side. I've noticed that all Motorola cable modes have a serial port on the back...is it possible to dial or telnet into this connection via modem or serial connection to reach a configuration menu?
Does anyone know of any external DSL or Cable modems that hook in via a serial connection or internal ones that are compatible with Linux? If they exist, then you can build your own firewall box.
At home, I use an ISDN line hooked into a 3Com ImpactIQ going into an old PC running Linux. I've got a custom kernel on it, ipmasq, ipchains, and the like. Beats the hell out of the ISDN router I got from my employer. It's infinitely more flexible and I can actually understand how to configure it (anyone ever try and configure a Pipeline 75? Ewwwww!)
I think most of you are being too hard on Mot and company. Yeah, these devices are somewhat more simplistic than what we can do ourselves, but most people don't have our level of knowledge. And let's face it, no security solution is going to be perfect. By rolling our own, we cetainly have the best chance at protecting ourselves.
Here's an idea for a consumer-grade device: how about a device that can be updated with new security fixes automatically? Obviously, the companies would sell a subscription to this service. Look, ma, a new revenue stream!
-- PhoneBoy
The views expressed herein are not necessarily those of anyone, including the poster.
Moderate the parent to this UP !
I guess the discussion is coming to a point whether we are no longer discussing Motorola's product, as stated in the article itself, but to the option the user does to the service being provided to him. You see, it's pretty much like somebody else told in the main thread: we are paying for the signal. What scares me is when we have money talking louder than quality of service. When we talk about high-speed connections, we want freedom too. I mean, what if I just connect a DSL machine to another machine thru another ethernet card and don't let it get nothing from the Internet, but still be able to get files I got from the Internet with that machine? Will that bypass the ToS? I guess so. It's time to stop with stupid commercial contracts obligating you to not do what you want to with things you've already paid for. I have heard true rumors that the new Brazilian DSL company named Speedy is limiting the number of TCP connections you can make at the same time! What is that? The same thing about a Cable Modem ISP, called Virtua, which is charging for bandwidth (you get 1GB/MONTH with the standard access plan). Come on, give us a break.
--
Carlos Laviola
Hi,
FYI, the Motorola product featured in the article
can do HPNA/USB/Ethernet bridging as well.
Hari.
I can look at the code in my router to make sure it does what I want, and not what my cable company wants. I (and only I) can configure it. Best of all, my cable company can't even tell it's providing all those services that I'm sure they'd love to force me to pay extra for if they could.
BTW, what cable modem provider tries to ban NAT? I've certainly seen them ban servers (not that they really enforce it unless you suck up too much bandwidth) but how could they possibly enforce a prohibition on NAT?
Phil
I have a cable modem and a local network, with three user nodes. This new modem would be great for a simple shared connection, but what if I want more? I want an IMAP mail server so that I can get saved mail from any of the three computers. I want an http server to use netscape roaming access, so I can get my bookmarks and preferences anywhere. I want a samba server to keep documents centralized and make backups easy. I want port forwarding to make servers on internal nodes visible.
:) ), but you can't do any of that with this simple modem. You need a server. Load linux on it, enable ip masquerading, named, and then configure to taste. I admit that most people wouldn't be able to set up all these features. My setup is not for everyone. I just don't want people to think this is the ultimate tool for a home network. Also, I'm predicting that people are going to want far more bandwidth than HomePNA can ever provide. I mean 100BaseT, for decent quality video between two points. If you do it yourself, with NICs, cat5, and a switch (yes, a switch. they're amazingly cheap these days, so buy one.), you'll have much more room for expansion in the future.
All those features make home network much easier for the users (just ask my parents
In case you're wondering, my server is a $100 compaq from onsale.com. It's running RH6.1. No keyboard, mouse, or monitor. I get mail for all four family members with fetchmail, and serve it with imapd. It's a nice combination, and very easy to set up. All three clients run netscape mail under various windows versions. Roaming access for netscape is possible with some creative tweaks to apache. It's a _very_ nice feature. Use it. Other services: sendmail (for fetchmail and mailman mailing lists), apache, ssh, samba, ftp. If you're smart, you'll run a dhcp server too.
TOS meaning "The Original Series", of course.
oooohoo!! faster porn downloads!!
I've had a cable modem for almost 2 years and know a shitload of people around Michigan using one. Here are some facts I have come to know as a result of this and other circumstances: (All numbers refer to bits)
1. Motorola's modems theoretical top speed is around 33 mbps, but even that is limited to 10 mbps ethernet interface.
2. I have NEVER hit faster than 1.6-1.8 mbps.
3. I have a REALLY REALY GOOD connection. Most people I know almost never hit 1 mbps.
4. A guy I worked with was told directly by one the senior managers of Mediaone that for the for foreseeable future, even though the local loops can probably handle around 7 mbps, they are capping it around 1-2 mbps.
But most of all, let's use common sense. Since that kind of bandwidth would be useless without a serious backbone upgrade for Mediaone and others I don't see why anyone would care. Think of this if you will as the first generation cell phones. I don't think it mattered that much which bulky Motorola phone you got for free from your cell phone company ten years ago, they all ended up in the garbage pretty soon anyway.
I run my own tiny home page on my own domain. I'd be lucky to generate 500MB of traffic per MONTH. Where is the room in the TOS for the small non-proifit, non-commercial, low-bandwidth, tinkerer who wants to run apache and experiment with cgi scripting, run ssh for remote shell sessions. No one is talking about sucking up masive amounts of bandwidth here. I fail to see how this is worse than the guy next doot downloading 30GB of pr0n (the full monthly xfer limit) every month, since on our cablemodem network, there's no tradeoff between available upload bandwidth and download bandwidth, it's essentially thinwire ethernet. xmit and rcv are on same freq.
What people do with bandwidth is not as important as how much bandwidth the use. Set a base amount of GB/month you can transfer (up *or* down) for free each month and have an exponentially ramping cost per GB beyond that to price out the warez/mp3 kiddiez and the spammers.
Computers4sure has it for $150.
non-afilliate link
affillate link
Not quite the deal of a 4 port switch, but hell, it's $100 with a web interface and telnet.
All signals are analog. All signals that carry information are modulated in some fashion. The simplest modulation is on-off keying. For example, 2.6V-5VT is defined as "1" and below 2.4V is "0". That's probably what your thinking of as "pure digital" but, aside from *short* range copper and fiber, nothing is on-off-keyed.
The modulation ISDN uses called 2b1q
ADSL uses DMT. DMT is pretty complex. It envolves sending data across multiple sinusoidal subcariers. It looks nothing like a square wave.
Well isn't this interesting. It was only yesturday that I thought to myself that cable modems could (and should) act as a firewall. Looks like someone beat me to the idea though! And it looks like they added some other nice features to it. I still find it ironic that the story comes out just the next day!! I guess that kinda thing happens once in a while.
Cable companies have a hard time actually capping connections on their end, usually this is done via the modem's config. ADSL is not like that though. Most ADSL networks have the ATM link limitted to a certain ammount of bandwidth. You cannot just flash a modem to upgrade it's speed with ADSL (unless its not a capped service).
With the 3Com Dual Link modem (basically the same thing as what Motorola is now saying they are going to offer) there is a console and telnet ability... If you want a real "hackable" modem, I'd recommend the 3Com dual link.
The 3Com dual link is VERY VERY VERY configurable via the console, you just have to know what your doing. It handles multiple ATM links also.
x-empt
Ever need an online dictionary?
Sprint/Earthlink has a policy for it's DSL subscribers, which I have refused to follow and I make it very clear to any Sprint techs that I do not believe in it.
:)
If they see any kind of network in the home, they will not do the install, unless it is a business account. If they come on site for maintenance or something and notice a network, they terminate service.
Sprint / Earthlink suck pretty bad in terms of what they allow customers to do. Plus it appears like some areas they force all connections going out to a port 80 to filter through their proxy/caching servers 208.13.143.71 is one of those I believe. (Anyone want to root it?
x-empt
Ever need an online dictionary?
The solution seems obvious enough to me.
now all i need is for cable to be laid in my area....=(
Thanks for the info! If I could moderate you, I'd moderate you up because I'm probably going to pick one of these up this weekend.
I have a website. It's about Macs.
ADSL is pretty much useless in on the free market
Uh, why is it useless?
I have Bell/Stinkpatico's ADSL with the NORTEL 1 Meg Modem, and the only thing I had to do on my end was plug the thing into the wall and my Mac and install the PPPoE software!
As for Cable Modems, think about availability: Rogers has no clear time as to when they're getting around to providing access in my neighbourhood, whereas Bell ADSL was available throughout *most* of Toronto in December 1998.
Pope
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Get an minimalistic ident daemon to run on your firewall that always returns the same username.. say "firewall-user@whatever.com". I do this and it works fine. :-)
When are the network providers and ISPs going to get a damn clue?
I know this is a rant. But I'm tired of ISPs either trying to pigeon-hole me as a Windoze luser or having to pay exorbitant rates because they want to classify what I want as business services!
The U-Gate 3000 has been powering my home connection for a long time now. My 6 PCs all have shared access through 10/100 Ethernet. DHCP, NAT and other services work too.
Check out www.cayman.com. The 2e-500 and 2e500h will work behind cable and dsl modems.
"Sigh... All I want...full-time connection, static IP, primary/secondary DNS, MX, about US$50-US$60/month."
I work for a CM provider and we do all that you want at reasonable prices. DNS/MX w/static..$50 setup and $10 per month on top of your other services. Basic cable modem service is going to run you $40 per month.
We run our network a bit differently from others around the US. We give you dedicated bandwidth and have built the network so that you are *not* competing with your neighbors for bandwidth.
We also give you a per month GB limit. Exceed it and it costs you $20 per GB. Great for those MP3 and pr0n junkies.
Joe Average User gets 256/64 with 5gb of data transfer for $39.99. Add $10 and upgrade your speed to 512/128 but the data transfer stays the same.
Want more GBs? $100 gets you 768/192 w/10gb, $300 is 1024/256 w/17gb.
Wanna run a game server? Go ahead.
Wanna run a http/ftp server? Go ahead.
Wanna have more than one machine hooked up? Go ahead.
You can have up to 8 using our DHCP server to assign IPs. You're already paying for the bandwidth....do what you want with it. Our pricing is the same for consumers as it is for business when dealing with the cable modem products.
The only catch with all this? You have to move to Alaska.
I'm not sure the Motorola product will be compatable with our current network. I'm thinking not. We're working with Com21 on a similar CM/FW unit.
Kaz, the cable modem queen
The CyberSURFR CableModems have a serial port on the back, yes. These are for a dial-return system when your cable company doesn't have upstream capability. These are being used in other parts of the world, and rarely in the US.
If you can get into the Wave, it shows diagnostic information. You can't configure it locally. Hell, you can't even telnet to your local CableRouter if you're trying to from a modem connected to that router.
What do you mean by 'Lantastic Surfboard'? One is an Artisoft LAN product and the other is a Motorola (GI) CableModem.
- Exigency
If I've read right, the PL-100 comes with a CD-ROM to configure the modem to your liking, if you wish to do so. Sure, you can use the default settings that come with it, but who of us 'enlightened ones' would be happy with that?
-Exigency
Another one is at www.dubbele.com
-John
Thanks for adding that this sweet-sounding product is NOT the same as the Linksys.
FWIW, I DO have the Linksys ($150 from buy.com! Beat it!) and I'd say it's a great product (plug and go!) at a great price-point.
I wouldn't look for the Moto device to be in the same $ range, so if you need one of these now, go with the Linksys and your CableCo's device.
Why Corel? It is just a Debian derivitive. Why do you give it more weight? Personally I like Mandrake better than Red Hat but am looking at other distros too.
-n-o-t-e-x-t-