Re: Setting up a home LAN
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 04:07:35PM -0500, Stephen Gran wrote:
> The only shared services will be printing and 2 exported directories,
> both coming off the main workstation.
I have printer on the firewall gateway..
> I think that the firewall box should be set up with 2 NIC's - eth0
> will be the external, and use dhcp. eth1 will be internal and have a
Yes - the prefered approach.
> Then configuring all the other boxen to staic IP's using 192.68.1.1 as
> a gateway is trivial. The only thing I'm not sure of is, can I
> specify what addresses are valid for forwarding? This is just a home
> LAN, after all, and security within the LAN is not that important, but
> it seems like there should be a way to specify "we forward for only
> these addresses" somewhere. I know you can set it up with dhcp, but
> if you use static addressing, is there such a way, without adding
> routes manually?
forwarding for what? for Masq? Just set all from local nic. IMO, that's
secure enough..... Just your prerouting rules and stuff should drop all
packets that originate on private net and get in from your external
interface... I had a few here and I'm on supposedly secure cable...
> Second question: I've seen a bunch of of hubs out there, but I'd like
> a few suggestions if you guys and gals don't mind. I'm inclined to
> stay away from the USB and/or wireless ones. I've also read in some
> of there specs that some have built-in firewalls, routing, and so
> forth. Will any of the built in routing confuse the firewall's
> routing?
Kernel can do all routing you want (2.4.x series) so save your money and
at most get a regular hub for the internal part. These routers will not
confuse the kernel but you might get confused :)
I'm cheap and all so I don't even have a hub - I use the old coaxial
style ethernet for internal network. You only need one cheap cable
and if you don't mind a few collisions and have a slow network anyway
then this is the cheap and reliable choice. Most 10MBps nics are both
RJ45 and coaxial capable.
Reply to: