network question - is this unusual?

[Bill Davidsen]

Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
> Gerhard Magnus wrote:
>> I recently had to deal with my ISP about a connectivity problem that
>> turned out to be on their end. (The tech referred to linux as lie-nux
>> and insisted on doing everything in XP which I fortunately had
>> dual-booted.) But in the process of working through this it was
>> necessary for me to describe the way I'd set up my LAN here and he
>> seemed incredulous. This wouldn't bother me except that I've gotten this
>> reaction before from people in the outside world but never an
>> explanation. So I'm asking: is there something weird about this
>> structure? Is there some "better" or more standard setup?
>>
>> The DSL modem Actiontec modem provided by Quest plugs into the phone
>> jack. The Actiontec is an older model with only one ethernet plug. Since
>> I have four boxes, two of which are dual booting Fedora and XP, I have
>> an ethernet cable connecting the modem to the DSL plug of a Linksys
>> router. I then have separate cables connecting the four outlets on the
>> router to each of the four boxes. (I did all this cabling at a time
>> before wireless routing was as available and cheap as it is today.)
>>
>> Each of the six operating systems (4 linux and 2 XP) has a static IP
>> address and each has a firewall. I have NFS running on the linux
>> systems. There's another firewall on the router, which is currently
>> port-forwarding only ssh and torrent data from the outside world.
>>
>> I thought I'd check this out before going further....
>>   
> I have done this many times, as far back as I can remember
> so I'd think it's pretty common.  I have found that some of
> the first-line techs can be pretty clueless, so you could force
> escalate to a higher level tech if you are not getting anywhere
> or, do the research yourself.  Kind of hard to do without an
> Internet connection ;)
> 
> My home system  uses a Westell modem, in bridge mode,
> and is hooked to a Trendnet 300Mb/s wireless router.
> 
> At another place, I have an ActionTec with Quest branding,
> pretty azure/blue glow lights modem.  This is one is wireless
> but without the module and I declined the upgrade (cuz it was at
> rip-off prices at the time) and got a better deal for an Airlink 150N
> wireless router at sale prices.
> 
> As with both modems mentioned abovet, the setup is to set the
> modems in "bridge" mode  which means, all data is passed through
> with no restrictions.  After that,  just hook up the Ethernet cable from
> the modem to your (wireless) router's WAN connection.  What's left
> then, is to configure the firewall settings on the router.
> 
In bridge mode does you ISP see all the MAC addresses directly and assign IPs? I 
have been told by friends that the more typical thing is that the modem 
(wireless + four wires mostly) has DHCP and does NAT so everything takes but a 
single IP.

My firewall makes sure that happens, my one ISP is a business connection with 
static IPs rather than DHCP, but the other is a telco, and I keep a low profile.

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot