* * * Cross Posted * * * comp.os.linux.networking, alt.comp.networking.routers, alt.comp.networking.connectivity Greetings to all: History & Current conditions: Recently our daughter had her own SOHO Linksys WCG200 Wireless Cable Gateway retired, in favor of the cable provider's Motorola Cable Modem/Router/Telephone Modem unit. She hasn't missed loosing her wireless capability, as she seldom ever used her own laptops with it and the laptops are all but retired. However, she's very frequently on the Internet with her desktop system. I have inherited the retired Linksys WCG200 Cable Gateway. In my home, I have an older model Linksys BEFCMU10 Version 2 Cable Modem and a recent model Linksys WRT310N Wireless Router, where I have only the slightest need for the wireless capability for occasional maintenance of our youngest son's laptop when he's in the geographic area. However, I support multiple desktop systems (Linux and one part time Windows XP Pro system) with my recent model Linksys WRT310N Router. Query: Could I marginally benefit from retiring my older Linksys BEFCMU10 Cable modem, and replacing it with my daughter's now retired older model Linksys WCG200 Cable Gateway such that I would have a cascaded topology of two UPS protected routers? Current: ISP <--> BEFCMU10 <--> WRT310N <--> Linux/Windows systems Proposed: ISP <--> WCG200 <--> WRT310N <--> Linux/Windows systems Rational: 1.) Recent Trojan malware attacks, aimed at routers with poor password protection. 2.) Enjoy further networking isolation such that a second and different range of class “C” IP addresses could possibly protect against /some/ future intrusion attempts. I can cope with the extra layer of complexity, if the benefit is some extra Internet safety. Isn't this what large, centrally located organizations do? Even if the benefits are only minimal. Thank you in advance. Pete
