Ideas: specific high-speed internet requirement.

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Crash, Nov 8, 2004.

  1. Crash

    Crash Guest

    Greetings all,

    I have tried to follow the various threads outlining high-speed (as in >
    dial-up) internet access but with many threads and lots of posts in each I
    have had to be a bit selective in my reading...

    The core need I have is to work at home in Wellington as a contractor for a
    Sydney-based employer with a global presence. The basic need is to be able
    to use a Windows VPN client too tunnel into a corporate intranet via a
    NZ-based gateway at my own expense to avoid moving to Sydney. I plan to try
    to operate using remote desktop (XP home to XP pro) to 'take over' my
    Sydney-based PC. An alternative is to set up my (Wellington) home PC to take
    over my Sydney PC meaning a minimal impact on the software installed on my
    home PC. The organisation I am working for has telecommuters but most work
    at least one day a week in the office whereas I will be remote for probably
    3 out of 4 weeks. The 1 week in 4 in Sydney is needed because I work in a
    support environment where there is teamwork needed. The costs of this are
    all mine (through my company).

    The choice seems to boil down to ADSL vs Telstra-Clear (was Saturn). I am
    looking at 2 gigs per month. My thinking is that if remote desktop works
    then I will need a near-constant network bandpass (probably 256K) to drive
    the display of data but if not I will need to less frequently (but still
    every few minutes) get relatively large chunks of data to various servers,
    meaning the >256k will be required to keep hour-glass freeze at bay. It
    seems that its either 256k or 2mb as the speed option.

    The advantage of ADSL is the choice of ISP (generates competition in the
    overall cost) and convenience of minimal additional installation. The major
    disadvantages of ADSL are that the service quality is uncertain (my Telecom
    phone lists as ADSL-capable but the vagaries of copper network quality mean
    that quality cannot be predicted until ADSL is enabled and tried) and
    multiple vendors are involved (ISP and Telecom) in service provision to my
    street connection point.

    The advantage of TS is that it is a single-vendor solution to the street
    connection point. The disadvantage is that (ignoring non-internet TS
    options) there is no competition and the pricing plans are a bit higher.

    Overall, the TS solution seems to have the edge primarily because it is a
    single-vendor solution and (if it works well) they have attractive bundles
    for phone and TV as well as internet access.

    I will be connecting up to 3 PCs. I am a network novice. The notion of each
    PC being able to have internet access independently appeals but the cost of
    a router in addition to a cable modem does not - and I believe that I can
    avoid a router by using one of the PCs as a gateway to the internet with a
    shared internet connection.

    Feedback appreciated. Linux is not an option (VPN client is Windows) so
    please no religious wars here.

    TIA,
    Crash.
     
    Crash, Nov 8, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Crash

    JohnO Guest

    "Crash" <> wrote in message
    news:418f542c$0$1680$...
    > Greetings all,
    >
    > I have tried to follow the various threads outlining high-speed (as in >
    > dial-up) internet access but with many threads and lots of posts in each I
    > have had to be a bit selective in my reading...
    >
    > The core need I have is to work at home in Wellington as a contractor for
    > a
    > Sydney-based employer with a global presence. The basic need is to be able
    > to use a Windows VPN client too tunnel into a corporate intranet via a
    > NZ-based gateway at my own expense to avoid moving to Sydney. I plan to
    > try
    > to operate using remote desktop (XP home to XP pro) to 'take over' my
    > Sydney-based PC. An alternative is to set up my (Wellington) home PC to
    > take
    > over my Sydney PC meaning a minimal impact on the software installed on my
    > home PC. The organisation I am working for has telecommuters but most
    > work
    > at least one day a week in the office whereas I will be remote for
    > probably
    > 3 out of 4 weeks. The 1 week in 4 in Sydney is needed because I work in
    > a
    > support environment where there is teamwork needed. The costs of this are
    > all mine (through my company).
    >
    > The choice seems to boil down to ADSL vs Telstra-Clear (was Saturn). I am
    > looking at 2 gigs per month. My thinking is that if remote desktop works
    > then I will need a near-constant network bandpass (probably 256K) to drive
    > the display of data but if not I will need to less frequently (but still
    > every few minutes) get relatively large chunks of data to various servers,
    > meaning the >256k will be required to keep hour-glass freeze at bay. It
    > seems that its either 256k or 2mb as the speed option.
    >
    > The advantage of ADSL is the choice of ISP (generates competition in the
    > overall cost) and convenience of minimal additional installation. The
    > major
    > disadvantages of ADSL are that the service quality is uncertain (my
    > Telecom
    > phone lists as ADSL-capable but the vagaries of copper network quality
    > mean
    > that quality cannot be predicted until ADSL is enabled and tried) and
    > multiple vendors are involved (ISP and Telecom) in service provision to my
    > street connection point.
    >
    > The advantage of TS is that it is a single-vendor solution to the street
    > connection point. The disadvantage is that (ignoring non-internet TS
    > options) there is no competition and the pricing plans are a bit higher.
    >
    > Overall, the TS solution seems to have the edge primarily because it is a
    > single-vendor solution and (if it works well) they have attractive bundles
    > for phone and TV as well as internet access.
    >
    > I will be connecting up to 3 PCs. I am a network novice. The notion of
    > each
    > PC being able to have internet access independently appeals but the cost
    > of
    > a router in addition to a cable modem does not - and I believe that I can
    > avoid a router by using one of the PCs as a gateway to the internet with a
    > shared internet connection.
    >
    > Feedback appreciated. Linux is not an option (VPN client is Windows) so
    > please no religious wars here.
    >
    > TIA,
    > Crash.
    >
    >


    I use RDP (terminal services) all the time over adsl to clients in Auckland,
    Christchurch and occasionally the UK. Not only does it work fine, but it
    works fine even on 128K jetstart. The short packets seem to slip through
    before the bandwidth limiting gets a chance to take hold. You just need to
    avoid large bitmaps - they really slow things down.

    If adsl is down, you can get by with RDP over dialup. Whereas adsl is like
    being there, dial up is noticeably slower, but still quite usable while adsl
    is temporarily down.

    If your client has a citrix server available then thats even better - the
    ICA protocol seems more efficient over a WAN than regular terminal services.

    I'd get an adsl/router/switch if I were you. Just as easy if not easier to
    setup as a PC router, and it takes away dependence on that machine being up.
    Devices such as these are dirt cheap now - no more than a couple o' hundy.
    They also offer DHCP server, firewall, etc etc.
     
    JohnO, Nov 8, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Crash

    Allistar Guest

    Crash wrote:

    > Greetings all,
    >
    > I have tried to follow the various threads outlining high-speed (as in >
    > dial-up) internet access but with many threads and lots of posts in each I
    > have had to be a bit selective in my reading...
    >
    > The core need I have is to work at home in Wellington as a contractor for
    > a Sydney-based employer with a global presence. The basic need is to be
    > able to use a Windows VPN client too tunnel into a corporate intranet via
    > a
    > NZ-based gateway at my own expense to avoid moving to Sydney. I plan to
    > try to operate using remote desktop (XP home to XP pro) to 'take over' my
    > Sydney-based PC. An alternative is to set up my (Wellington) home PC to
    > take over my Sydney PC meaning a minimal impact on the software installed
    > on my
    > home PC. The organisation I am working for has telecommuters but most
    > work at least one day a week in the office whereas I will be remote for
    > probably
    > 3 out of 4 weeks. The 1 week in 4 in Sydney is needed because I work in
    > a
    > support environment where there is teamwork needed. The costs of this are
    > all mine (through my company).
    >
    > The choice seems to boil down to ADSL vs Telstra-Clear (was Saturn). I am
    > looking at 2 gigs per month. My thinking is that if remote desktop works
    > then I will need a near-constant network bandpass (probably 256K) to drive
    > the display of data but if not I will need to less frequently (but still
    > every few minutes) get relatively large chunks of data to various servers,
    > meaning the >256k will be required to keep hour-glass freeze at bay. It
    > seems that its either 256k or 2mb as the speed option.
    >
    > The advantage of ADSL is the choice of ISP (generates competition in the
    > overall cost) and convenience of minimal additional installation. The
    > major disadvantages of ADSL are that the service quality is uncertain (my
    > Telecom phone lists as ADSL-capable but the vagaries of copper network
    > quality mean that quality cannot be predicted until ADSL is enabled and
    > tried) and multiple vendors are involved (ISP and Telecom) in service
    > provision to my street connection point.
    >
    > The advantage of TS is that it is a single-vendor solution to the street
    > connection point. The disadvantage is that (ignoring non-internet TS
    > options) there is no competition and the pricing plans are a bit higher.
    >
    > Overall, the TS solution seems to have the edge primarily because it is a
    > single-vendor solution and (if it works well) they have attractive bundles
    > for phone and TV as well as internet access.
    >
    > I will be connecting up to 3 PCs. I am a network novice. The notion of
    > each PC being able to have internet access independently appeals but the
    > cost of a router in addition to a cable modem does not - and I believe
    > that I can avoid a router by using one of the PCs as a gateway to the
    > internet with a shared internet connection.
    >
    > Feedback appreciated. Linux is not an option (VPN client is Windows) so
    > please no religious wars here.
    >
    > TIA,
    > Crash.


    I contract as a software developer and consultant which sees me quite often
    connecting from home to various clients. Although I use Linux that is not
    relevant here. I use an ICA (i.e. Metaframe) connection predominately and
    even the odd VNC connection. I have a 256kb/s ADSL connection with a 10Gb
    cap through Paradise.net and I find the ICA connection feels as if "I was
    really there". On my major client I VPN into their network and then use a
    combination of SSH, VNC, NXClient (tunnelled over ssh) to access resources
    of both the office network and my office PC.
    At home we have a Nokia M1122 router. Old I know but it allows us to connect
    3 PCs and a printer to our home network as well as all PC's having access
    to the internet. I don't think such ADSL routers are expensive these days
    (although it cost me about $500 a few years ago).
    One thing to consider is what to do when your connectino disappears. In my
    experience this has heppened to me 2 or 3 times in the last few years - I
    am very happy with the quality of my ADSL service. I am not so reliant on
    it as one of my clientsa in 10 minutes away so that's my fall-back plan.
    You won't have that luxury over the Tasman, so I suggest have adial-up
    connection for those unforseen outages.

    Regards,
    Allistar.
     
    Allistar, Nov 8, 2004
    #3
  4. Crash

    JedMeister Guest

    "Crash" <> wrote in message
    news:418f542c$0$1680$...
    > Greetings all,
    >
    > I have tried to follow the various threads outlining high-speed (as in >
    > dial-up) internet access but with many threads and lots of posts in each I
    > have had to be a bit selective in my reading...
    >
    > The core need I have is to work at home in Wellington as a contractor for
    > a
    > Sydney-based employer with a global presence. The basic need is to be able
    > to use a Windows VPN client too tunnel into a corporate intranet via a
    > NZ-based gateway at my own expense to avoid moving to Sydney. I plan to
    > try
    > to operate using remote desktop (XP home to XP pro) to 'take over' my
    > Sydney-based PC. An alternative is to set up my (Wellington) home PC to
    > take
    > over my Sydney PC meaning a minimal impact on the software installed on my
    > home PC. The organisation I am working for has telecommuters but most
    > work
    > at least one day a week in the office whereas I will be remote for
    > probably
    > 3 out of 4 weeks. The 1 week in 4 in Sydney is needed because I work in
    > a
    > support environment where there is teamwork needed. The costs of this are
    > all mine (through my company).
    >
    > The choice seems to boil down to ADSL vs Telstra-Clear (was Saturn). I am
    > looking at 2 gigs per month. My thinking is that if remote desktop works
    > then I will need a near-constant network bandpass (probably 256K) to drive
    > the display of data but if not I will need to less frequently (but still
    > every few minutes) get relatively large chunks of data to various servers,
    > meaning the >256k will be required to keep hour-glass freeze at bay. It
    > seems that its either 256k or 2mb as the speed option.
    >
    > The advantage of ADSL is the choice of ISP (generates competition in the
    > overall cost) and convenience of minimal additional installation. The
    > major
    > disadvantages of ADSL are that the service quality is uncertain (my
    > Telecom
    > phone lists as ADSL-capable but the vagaries of copper network quality
    > mean
    > that quality cannot be predicted until ADSL is enabled and tried) and
    > multiple vendors are involved (ISP and Telecom) in service provision to my
    > street connection point.
    >
    > The advantage of TS is that it is a single-vendor solution to the street
    > connection point. The disadvantage is that (ignoring non-internet TS
    > options) there is no competition and the pricing plans are a bit higher.
    >
    > Overall, the TS solution seems to have the edge primarily because it is a
    > single-vendor solution and (if it works well) they have attractive bundles
    > for phone and TV as well as internet access.
    >
    > I will be connecting up to 3 PCs. I am a network novice. The notion of
    > each
    > PC being able to have internet access independently appeals but the cost
    > of
    > a router in addition to a cable modem does not - and I believe that I can
    > avoid a router by using one of the PCs as a gateway to the internet with a
    > shared internet connection.
    >
    > Feedback appreciated. Linux is not an option (VPN client is Windows) so
    > please no religious wars here.
    >
    > TIA,
    > Crash.
    >

    I use Cisco VPN to connect to my client in Europe, via Telecom ADSL . There
    is no real competition in NZ, ultimately you go through Telecom no matter
    which ISP you choose so there will not be that much difference in prices
    between ISP's.

    I don't use remote desktop but connect directly to their database servers
    via emulation software. It works absolutely brilliantly through ADSL.
    Currently I have exceeded my 10gig cap, the limited speed seems OK for what
    I am doing.

    Over the last year, I've had about 3 or 4 outages...usually these last just
    a couple of hours (blaster took me out for an entire day though).
     
    JedMeister, Nov 8, 2004
    #4
  5. Crash

    Daniel Guest

    Crash wrote:
    > Greetings all,
    >
    > I have tried to follow the various threads outlining high-speed (as in >
    > dial-up) internet access but with many threads and lots of posts in each I
    > have had to be a bit selective in my reading...
    >

    <snip>
    >
    > Feedback appreciated. Linux is not an option (VPN client is Windows) so
    > please no religious wars here.
    >
    > TIA,
    > Crash.
    >
    >


    If it's in your budget get a router that supports VPN tunnels. Ascent
    sell a couple of Linksys routers that both do VPN tunnelling, however,
    one does it in software (I think) so it only supports 2 tunnels, but
    the other one uses a hardware encryption and supports up to 70 tunnels
    (not that you'd need that I'm guessing).

    The tunnelling is transparent to the PC, and apparently the router
    implements some nifty security measures.

    * http://www.ascent.co.nz/mn-product-spec.asp?pid=109936
    * http://www.ascent.co.nz/mn-product-spec.asp?pid=109927

    You might want checkout the other brands, I've looked at Linksys.
     
    Daniel, Nov 9, 2004
    #5
  6. Crash

    tatties Guest

    "Daniel" <> wrote in message
    news:cmp1dg$ok$...
    > Crash wrote:
    >> Greetings all,
    >>
    >> I have tried to follow the various threads outlining high-speed (as in >
    >> dial-up) internet access but with many threads and lots of posts in each
    >> I
    >> have had to be a bit selective in my reading...
    >>

    > <snip>
    >>
    >> Feedback appreciated. Linux is not an option (VPN client is Windows) so
    >> please no religious wars here.
    >>
    >> TIA,
    >> Crash.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > If it's in your budget get a router that supports VPN tunnels. Ascent
    > sell a couple of Linksys routers that both do VPN tunnelling, however,
    > one does it in software (I think) so it only supports 2 tunnels, but
    > the other one uses a hardware encryption and supports up to 70 tunnels
    > (not that you'd need that I'm guessing).
    >
    > The tunnelling is transparent to the PC, and apparently the router
    > implements some nifty security measures.
    >
    > * http://www.ascent.co.nz/mn-product-spec.asp?pid=109936
    > * http://www.ascent.co.nz/mn-product-spec.asp?pid=109927
    >
    > You might want checkout the other brands, I've looked at Linksys.
    >


    He won't need one at his client end to use Microsoft PPTP VPN though, and at
    the host end a normal router set to forward TCP port 1723 will suffice.
     
    tatties, Nov 9, 2004
    #6
  7. Crash

    Daniel Guest

    tatties wrote:
    >>
    >>If it's in your budget get a router that supports VPN tunnels. Ascent
    >>sell a couple of Linksys routers that both do VPN tunnelling, however,
    >>one does it in software (I think) so it only supports 2 tunnels, but
    >>the other one uses a hardware encryption and supports up to 70 tunnels
    >>(not that you'd need that I'm guessing).
    >>
    >>The tunnelling is transparent to the PC, and apparently the router
    >>implements some nifty security measures.
    >>
    >>* http://www.ascent.co.nz/mn-product-spec.asp?pid=109936
    >>* http://www.ascent.co.nz/mn-product-spec.asp?pid=109927
    >>
    >>You might want checkout the other brands, I've looked at Linksys.
    >>

    >
    >
    > He won't need one at his client end to use Microsoft PPTP VPN though, and at
    > the host end a normal router set to forward TCP port 1723 will suffice.
    >
    >


    Yeah, I forgot he's probably going to use MS PPTP VPN, which basically makes
    an IPSec capable router redundant. Although, he'll still need PPTP
    pass-through capability.

    Depends on whether the host uses IPSec though - in which case an IPSec
    capable router would be a wise idea. I guess in those instances PPTP just
    sits on top of IPSec (which would make the tunnelling more secure).
     
    Daniel, Nov 9, 2004
    #7
  8. Crash

    thing Guest

    Crash wrote:
    > Greetings all,
    >
    > I have tried to follow the various threads outlining high-speed (as in >
    > dial-up) internet access but with many threads and lots of posts in each I
    > have had to be a bit selective in my reading...
    >
    > The core need I have is to work at home in Wellington as a contractor for a
    > Sydney-based employer with a global presence. The basic need is to be able
    > to use a Windows VPN client too tunnel into a corporate intranet via a
    > NZ-based gateway at my own expense to avoid moving to Sydney. I plan to try
    > to operate using remote desktop (XP home to XP pro) to 'take over' my
    > Sydney-based PC. An alternative is to set up my (Wellington) home PC to take
    > over my Sydney PC meaning a minimal impact on the software installed on my
    > home PC. The organisation I am working for has telecommuters but most work
    > at least one day a week in the office whereas I will be remote for probably
    > 3 out of 4 weeks. The 1 week in 4 in Sydney is needed because I work in a
    > support environment where there is teamwork needed. The costs of this are
    > all mine (through my company).
    >
    > The choice seems to boil down to ADSL vs Telstra-Clear (was Saturn). I am
    > looking at 2 gigs per month. My thinking is that if remote desktop works
    > then I will need a near-constant network bandpass (probably 256K) to drive
    > the display of data but if not I will need to less frequently (but still
    > every few minutes) get relatively large chunks of data to various servers,
    > meaning the >256k will be required to keep hour-glass freeze at bay. It
    > seems that its either 256k or 2mb as the speed option.
    >
    > The advantage of ADSL is the choice of ISP (generates competition in the
    > overall cost) and convenience of minimal additional installation. The major
    > disadvantages of ADSL are that the service quality is uncertain (my Telecom
    > phone lists as ADSL-capable but the vagaries of copper network quality mean
    > that quality cannot be predicted until ADSL is enabled and tried) and
    > multiple vendors are involved (ISP and Telecom) in service provision to my
    > street connection point.
    >
    > The advantage of TS is that it is a single-vendor solution to the street
    > connection point. The disadvantage is that (ignoring non-internet TS
    > options) there is no competition and the pricing plans are a bit higher.
    >
    > Overall, the TS solution seems to have the edge primarily because it is a
    > single-vendor solution and (if it works well) they have attractive bundles
    > for phone and TV as well as internet access.
    >
    > I will be connecting up to 3 PCs. I am a network novice. The notion of each
    > PC being able to have internet access independently appeals but the cost of
    > a router in addition to a cable modem does not - and I believe that I can
    > avoid a router by using one of the PCs as a gateway to the internet with a
    > shared internet connection.
    >
    > Feedback appreciated. Linux is not an option (VPN client is Windows) so
    > please no religious wars here.
    >
    > TIA,
    > Crash.
    >
    >



    I run rdesktop (linux) terminal services to a NTx box over paradise
    cable so TS is fine. Ditto Cisco VPN on a win2k client to our cisco
    gateway all runs OK. Ditto linux ~ linux ipsec tunnel, windows ~ linux
    ipsec tunnel, you have a few choices......

    I have had cable since 1999, it has been very reliable, uptime must be
    99.9+%.

    I have the original com21 cablemodem, it feeds into a Linux firewall and
    then a 100 meg switch, Cisco VPN and rdesktop all run fine from clients
    off the switch. It has no firewall in it, but for me that does not
    matter as I have my linux box. For you I would suggest a cable modem
    with a firewall and ethernet switch built in, a little more to buy but
    easier to setup.

    For ADSL, D-link do a NAT firewall adsl modem with a 4?port switch that
    looks way neat. So that might suffice you as its simple and effective,
    ideal for a novice in terms of security concerns and setup.

    I would not advise getting a simple adsl modem with no firewall and
    sharing through a windows PC as the gateway. Not secure enough IMHO if
    you get hacked then your going to be facing huge bills, not a nice
    thought....

    My preference/advice is to go cable over adsl.

    regards

    Thing
     
    thing, Nov 9, 2004
    #8
  9. Crash

    Mr Scebe Guest

    "Daniel" <> wrote in message
    news:cmp1dg$ok$...

    > If it's in your budget get a router that supports VPN tunnels. Ascent
    > sell a couple of Linksys routers that both do VPN tunnelling, however,
    > one does it in software (I think) so it only supports 2 tunnels, but
    > the other one uses a hardware encryption and supports up to 70 tunnels
    > (not that you'd need that I'm guessing).
    >
    > The tunnelling is transparent to the PC, and apparently the router
    > implements some nifty security measures.


    This is assuming that the far end is quite happy allowing him to enter all
    the configuration data to establish the tunnel - in which case they would
    probably supply the equipment anyway.

    --
    Mr Scebe
    Losersh always whine about their 'besht'.
    Winnersh go home and **** the prom queen".
    ~Sean Connery in "The Rock"
     
    Mr Scebe, Nov 9, 2004
    #9
  10. Crash

    Crash Guest

    "Daniel" <> wrote in message
    news:cmp7sg$erl$...
    > tatties wrote:
    > >>
    > >>If it's in your budget get a router that supports VPN tunnels. Ascent
    > >>sell a couple of Linksys routers that both do VPN tunnelling, however,
    > >>one does it in software (I think) so it only supports 2 tunnels, but
    > >>the other one uses a hardware encryption and supports up to 70 tunnels
    > >>(not that you'd need that I'm guessing).
    > >>
    > >>The tunnelling is transparent to the PC, and apparently the router
    > >>implements some nifty security measures.
    > >>
    > >>* http://www.ascent.co.nz/mn-product-spec.asp?pid=109936
    > >>* http://www.ascent.co.nz/mn-product-spec.asp?pid=109927
    > >>
    > >>You might want checkout the other brands, I've looked at Linksys.
    > >>

    > >
    > >
    > > He won't need one at his client end to use Microsoft PPTP VPN though,

    and at
    > > the host end a normal router set to forward TCP port 1723 will suffice.
    > >
    > >

    >
    > Yeah, I forgot he's probably going to use MS PPTP VPN, which basically

    makes
    > an IPSec capable router redundant. Although, he'll still need PPTP
    > pass-through capability.
    >
    > Depends on whether the host uses IPSec though - in which case an IPSec
    > capable router would be a wise idea. I guess in those instances PPTP just
    > sits on top of IPSec (which would make the tunnelling more secure).
    >


    My client dictates the VPN router client from Nortel - comes
    pre-configured - including all their gateway servers. So I am stuck running
    this client on the pc I use for work.

    Thanks for the suggestions though.

    Crash.
     
    Crash, Nov 9, 2004
    #10
  11. Crash

    Crash Guest

    "thing" <> wrote in message
    news:_1Yjd.569$...
    [snip]

    > My preference/advice is to go cable over adsl.


    Thanks - and many thanks to other respondents as well.

    Crash.
     
    Crash, Nov 9, 2004
    #11
  12. Crash

    Bok Guest

    Crash wrote:
    > The choice seems to boil down to ADSL vs Telstra-Clear (was Saturn). I am
    > looking at 2 gigs per month. My thinking is that if remote desktop works
    > then I will need a near-constant network bandpass (probably 256K) to drive
    > the display of data but if not I will need to less frequently (but still
    > every few minutes) get relatively large chunks of data to various servers,
    > meaning the >256k will be required to keep hour-glass freeze at bay. It
    > seems that its either 256k or 2mb as the speed option.


    I've had a T/C cable connection since 2001 with a VPN to work. I leave
    the VPN tunnel established 24/7 for convenience. I started off with
    256Kb/128Kb and upgraded to 2Mb/512k this year.

    My gateway/router/VPN is a linux box running FreeSwan Ipsec. However, I
    generally connect to windows boxes at work from windows RDP clients. I
    also use SSH to connect to linux boxes at home from work.

    Bandwith and latency have not been an issue for the RDP client even with
    the slower 256kb connection. Unfortunately, I can't use RDP (terminal
    services) to connect to my own windows desktop at work since it's
    running Win2K so I use VNC instead - that was a bit painful to use at
    256Kb for certain apps.

    The Terminal Services or ICA/Metaframe protocols are a lot more
    efficient than VNC I've found.

    > I will be connecting up to 3 PCs. I am a network novice. The notion of each
    > PC being able to have internet access independently appeals but the cost of
    > a router in addition to a cable modem does not - and I believe that I can
    > avoid a router by using one of the PCs as a gateway to the internet with a
    > shared internet connection.


    Last time I looked DSE had a suitable router for under $100 retail. An
    alternative would be to get a cheap PC and run IpCop or similar. IpCop
    is a tailored linux distro targeted at providing router/firewall
    functionality. It also has IPSEC capability but it sounds like that's
    not useful in your scenario.

    Remember that cable modems (unlike ADSL routers) do not provide packet
    filtering so make sure your protect your network with some form of
    firewall, either in the form of a hardware router or a software based
    firewall in your gateway machine.
     
    Bok, Nov 10, 2004
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. mimiseh
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,055
  2. DannyD1355

    USB High Speed against USB Non High Speed

    DannyD1355, Sep 7, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    636
    Patrick
    Sep 7, 2003
  3. a.metselaar

    speed speed speed

    a.metselaar, Dec 28, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    1,060
    BuffNET Tech Support - MichaelJ
    Dec 30, 2003
  4. news.freedom2surf.net

    Help with connection to internet (hardware requirement)

    news.freedom2surf.net, Apr 21, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    1,715
    David Brown
    Apr 22, 2007
  5. Nancy
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    768
    kaiqiang
    Jun 26, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page