As another R50 user, I agree with you 100%. They are crap. The latest Ubuntu runs very well on it, but it still feels so inferior to my 3-year-old A22p. (Could just be that I can't stand the 1024x768 resolution on the R50, since I was used to my 1600x1200 on my A22p).
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
192.168.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 wvlan0
192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
xxx.xxx.xxx.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
0.0.0.0 xxx.xxx.xxx.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
The firewall serves up DHCP IP's for the wired network, and the wireless network (which only includes my laptop for now) are hardcoded. So, my laptop is configured to use 192.168.2.2 with a mask of 255.255.255.0 and a default gateway of 192.168.2.1. I also have DNS running on the firewall on eth1 (192.168.1.1), so I've just told my laptop to use that IP for its primary DNS.
Routing on the firewall is automatic. Any packet that is sent from the laptop to any external host is easily routed:
192.168.2.2 -> 192.168.2.1 -> eth0 on firewall -> external host
and vice-versa (with a NAT'ed laptop):
external host -> eth0 on firewall -> 192.168.2.1 -> 192.168.2.2
In other words, the router (firewall) is smart enough to talk back and forth between the 2 subnets, provided you *allow* it in your firewall ruleset. I'm using debian and ipchains for my firewall, but I'm sure that BSD/ipnat will allow the traffic to flow just the same. Updating my firewall was the one thing that I forgot to do initially -- until I allowed 192.168.2.x traffic to flow, *nothing* worked.
The *only* issue I have right now is trying to get Samba (on one of my "wired" machines) to exist in both subnets. The only way I can see the shares on the box is by IP address, not Netbios name. I'm sure this is something simple in the smb.conf file, but I haven't figured it out...yet.
I agree with your statements regarding the benefits and uses of wireless; however, my wireless setup is slightly different.
I went the cheaper route, and bought 2 of the Lucent Silver cards, and did *not* buy an access point. One card sits in my firewall on a separate subnet, and the other card is (of course) in my laptop. The laptop connects to the wireless card in the firewall, which is connected to my cable modem, so surfing Slashdot from my neighbors house is also a breeze.;-)
I can also print files, etc., from my laptop to a machine on the "wired" network (which is a different subnet than the wireless network) without any problems.
For me, speed has been outstanding. Obviously, surfing the web is not a problem, and even transfering files is about the same as two machines that are "wired" together. The only time I've ever noticed any delays are when I'm running remote X sessions, running things like Vim from across the street.
I'd be happy to explain more details of how it works, but I just wanted to say that I would definately recommend some sort of wireless solution -- especially if you have a laptop. I absolutely love it!
I've got Courier-IMAP running on a RH7 box, using the maildir format. This setup works great for mutt, which I use 95% of the time. It also works great w/ Netscape, which the wife uses.
The best part, though, is Squirrelmail. IMHO, it's the best web-based email program out there. It works with just about any IMAP server, and there's even a plugin to fetch POP mail. But, with Squirrelmail, my wife and I can always check our mail on the road. And when we get back home to our mutt and netscape mailer's, we just pick up right where we left off, since the folders are stored on the server.
The cool thing with IMAP is that the client becomes transparent -- it doesnt matter which one you use (as long as it supports IMAP, obviously).
Most of the @home users who are upset with this upload cap (like myself) are not as upset with the quality of service as we are with the lack of integrity of @home.
When I subscribed back in Dec-98, I was promised - via advertising, phone calls, emails, and from the technicians who came and installed the service - that I would receive 1MB upload speeds and 2MB downlooad speeds.
I asked about FTP/HTTP servers and the like, and they said they did not recommend this, due to security issues. They did not claim that this would violate the AUP. In fact, I read through the policy with the technicians, and the only thing that we could find relative to these servers, is that if you decide to run them, @home would not be responsible for the security issues involved.
The point is, if @home is only going to allow 128kb upload speeds, they need to make it perfectly clear to subscribers. I have no problem if they want to "downgrade" my service. But, they should inform me ahead of time, and I should not have to pay the same price for fewer services. Their marketing department needs some work.
Slashdot Mirror
As another R50 user, I agree with you 100%. They are crap. The latest Ubuntu runs very well on it, but it still feels so inferior to my 3-year-old A22p. (Could just be that I can't stand the 1024x768 resolution on the R50, since I was used to my 1600x1200 on my A22p).
*digitally remaster* the first episode to improve the anime like everything else these days. :-)
I've got these interfaces on my firewall:
eth0 = external interface
eth1 = 192.168.1.1 (wired net)
wvlan0 = 192.168.2.1 (wireless net/silver card)
And the routing table:
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
192.168.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 wvlan0
192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
xxx.xxx.xxx.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
0.0.0.0 xxx.xxx.xxx.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
The firewall serves up DHCP IP's for the wired network, and the wireless network (which only includes my laptop for now) are hardcoded. So, my laptop is configured to use 192.168.2.2 with a mask of 255.255.255.0 and a default gateway of 192.168.2.1. I also have DNS running on the firewall on eth1 (192.168.1.1), so I've just told my laptop to use that IP for its primary DNS.
Routing on the firewall is automatic. Any packet that is sent from the laptop to any external host is easily routed:
192.168.2.2 -> 192.168.2.1 -> eth0 on firewall -> external host
and vice-versa (with a NAT'ed laptop):
external host -> eth0 on firewall -> 192.168.2.1 -> 192.168.2.2
In other words, the router (firewall) is smart enough to talk back and forth between the 2 subnets, provided you *allow* it in your firewall ruleset. I'm using debian and ipchains for my firewall, but I'm sure that BSD/ipnat will allow the traffic to flow just the same. Updating my firewall was the one thing that I forgot to do initially -- until I allowed 192.168.2.x traffic to flow, *nothing* worked.
The *only* issue I have right now is trying to get Samba (on one of my "wired" machines) to exist in both subnets. The only way I can see the shares on the box is by IP address, not Netbios name. I'm sure this is something simple in the smb.conf file, but I haven't figured it out...yet.
I agree with your statements regarding the benefits and uses of wireless; however, my wireless setup is slightly different.
;-)
I went the cheaper route, and bought 2 of the Lucent Silver cards, and did *not* buy an access point. One card sits in my firewall on a separate subnet, and the other card is (of course) in my laptop. The laptop connects to the wireless card in the firewall, which is connected to my cable modem, so surfing Slashdot from my neighbors house is also a breeze.
I can also print files, etc., from my laptop to a machine on the "wired" network (which is a different subnet than the wireless network) without any problems.
For me, speed has been outstanding. Obviously, surfing the web is not a problem, and even transfering files is about the same as two machines that are "wired" together. The only time I've ever noticed any delays are when I'm running remote X sessions, running things like Vim from across the street.
I'd be happy to explain more details of how it works, but I just wanted to say that I would definately recommend some sort of wireless solution -- especially if you have a laptop. I absolutely love it!
Anywho provides many of the same services as 555-1212...and AFAIK, it's all still free...
I've got Courier-IMAP running on a RH7 box, using the maildir format. This setup works great for mutt, which I use 95% of the time. It also works great w/ Netscape, which the wife uses.
The best part, though, is Squirrelmail. IMHO, it's the best web-based email program out there. It works with just about any IMAP server, and there's even a plugin to fetch POP mail. But, with Squirrelmail, my wife and I can always check our mail on the road. And when we get back home to our mutt and netscape mailer's, we just pick up right where we left off, since the folders are stored on the server.
The cool thing with IMAP is that the client becomes transparent -- it doesnt matter which one you use (as long as it supports IMAP, obviously).
When I subscribed back in Dec-98, I was promised - via advertising, phone calls, emails, and from the technicians who came and installed the service - that I would receive 1MB upload speeds and 2MB downlooad speeds.
I asked about FTP/HTTP servers and the like, and they said they did not recommend this, due to security issues. They did not claim that this would violate the AUP. In fact, I read through the policy with the technicians, and the only thing that we could find relative to these servers, is that if you decide to run them, @home would not be responsible for the security issues involved.
The point is, if @home is only going to allow 128kb upload speeds, they need to make it perfectly clear to subscribers. I have no problem if they want to "downgrade" my service. But, they should inform me ahead of time, and I should not have to pay the same price for fewer services. Their marketing department needs some work.