DSL Router [Archive] - Ceramic Tile Advice Forums - John Bridge Ceramic Tile


View Full Version : DSL Router

John Bridge
01-26-2002, 08:11 PM
I'm in the process of installing DSL at JB headquarters. Got my boy hooked up -- modem into the wall, computer into modem. Now I need a router and don't know anything about them. Right now the boy is one hell of a lot faster than me.

Someone told me the LinkSys was a good one.

What can I expect to pay for the router?

Sponsored Links

01-26-2002, 08:37 PM
Hell, I thought we'd been through this, John.

For general use router, I favor the new Bosch 2hp plunge with the electronic control. Costs about $200, American.


01-26-2002, 09:47 PM
How many computers are you going to connect to it?

Bud Cline
01-26-2002, 10:27 PM

Don't be rude.
Thank CX for his valuable information.

01-26-2002, 10:32 PM
3 com is another good one John, the cost depends on how many computers you connect to it. If there is a computer show near you thats probably your best bet.

John Bridge
01-27-2002, 08:24 AM
2 computers. I see a Seimens on sale for $50 at Comp USA. 4 ports.

Linksys also has a wireless set-up I could get into for about $400. Don't think my bookkeeper would agree to that, though.

CX, I done tole you I already have the Porter-Cable 3-1/4 horse. The router I'm after now has no horses at all. It doesn't even turn, and still they get fifty bucks for it.

[Edited by John Bridge on 01-27-2002 at 09:31 AM]

Big Tuna
01-27-2002, 04:54 PM
Hi John;

In my mind, wireless is the only way to go nowdays! No cables to run, don't have to worry about changing locations, easy to set up, no "tech" fees to install, what more could a guy ask for!

In my mind, money well spent!


John Bridge
01-27-2002, 05:13 PM
Bob, you're new and it's not your fault, but you don't understand the fiscal setup around here. In order for me to spend more than a hun at a time I have to start lobbying the "comptroller" about six months in advance. I don't want to wait that long. :D

I bought the Seimens for $50 American. Haven't gotten to the installation yet because I'm having trouble installing a network card on my computer. My son is continuing to enjoy the high-speed connection, though.

01-28-2002, 09:23 PM
Hey, whilst y'all're 'splainin' stuff, splain me about this routing DSL. Me, I plenty times route all kinda stuff - wood, MDF, concrete (eez by accident :D) - but never no DSL.

So, If my neighbor finally gets the local rinky dink co-op phone company to hook up DSL at his casa (likely), can I get one of them routers-with-no-horses, pewt it at his house, run some coax over to my hovel, and have me some DSL too? Can run twice computers at the same time, or even simultaneously? Phone company/ISP cares? If they care, can they tell? Is cheating? Is really, really fast?

C(learnin' about routers)X

[3 1/4hp router toooo damn heavy for hold-it-in-your-hand work, John. You need to get a smaller one. What you want for that one you got?]

01-28-2002, 10:27 PM
Your confusing John, he needs a simple router to bore holes in the wall to run cable through. Doesn't need 2.5 HP to do that, I would think 1.25 mghz would do that or a most one with a 1/2" byte.

01-29-2002, 02:56 PM
HA, HA, see, Jim don't know no more about routers than John!

Anybody what knows anything knows that a 1.25mghz router ain't gonna have but a 1/4" byte, not a 1/2".

Geez, I wish peoples that didn't have acrite information wouldn't post advice here, eh John?


01-29-2002, 03:42 PM
Hate to admit it but your right. This computer stuff is all just plain common sense. That fellow Watson that invented the computer and started I Itty B Bitty M Machine said the very same thing. Think his partner's name was Holmes, but they split up and Holmes started a burglar alarm business.

John Bridge
01-30-2002, 07:19 AM
Big router stays bolted to my router table. Hand held it once. That was enough.

You could steal the DSL easily, but you could go to jail just as easily for doing it. It's just like stealing cable. I think the fine is around $2,000 now.

Yes, the router enables you to run a number of computers at the same time. Super fast. 50 times faster than your dial-up modem. Cable modem is faster, though. It's not available in my area, or I'd have it.

01-30-2002, 09:27 AM
Good for you, John - I have the Linksys (wired). I'm sure any model will be fine for your application.

I have had both DSL and cable (started with dsl, provider went bankrupt, went with cable) - cable is only faster until they sign up lots of users, as cable slows down as more users log on, while dsl speeds remain more constant. Either way, which one is better will depend on providers in your area as well as condition of wiring (cable or telephone lines, incl line switches). My cable now runs about 1/3 the original speed when first installed.

Either is better than dial-up by far though. Once you try either, you will never want to drop back down to dial-up, IMO.


01-30-2002, 11:26 AM
Hey! I wasn't gonna steal nothin', just borrow from my good friend and neighbor.

John's gonna have a hook-up for his son and another for hisownself. How's that different from my neighbor having a hook-up and another one for moi? It's all on the same property, and all. My room's only about 80 feet from his room, and I got plenty RG6 in the trailer. I'd even help pay for the service.

This is "no fair"?

C(just wants to go faster)X

John Bridge
02-02-2002, 01:36 PM
What we're talking about here is a "household." The service is for one household that has a telephone line coming into it. If it's any other situation, it's no longer a household. My DSL prvider, Southwestern Bell, doesn't like routers, but it doesn't outlaw them because it can't. They would much rather sell you additional IPs, though. But hooking up more than one computer inside a residence is no different from hooking up more than one TV to cable service. Start running wires to the neighbors, though, and you're in for trouble.

They already have the term "cable theft." Now you're taking that to new heights.

"DSL rustling."

02-02-2002, 11:00 PM
Here we run cable and having the extra ips only cost 5 bucks more for each computer..not worth stealing for that.

Just got done reformating my pc tonight..complete format too.
It was just easier to add old stuff to a new setup then to delete all the excessive old files.
Clean and lean again for me.

02-02-2002, 11:09 PM

I sure wish you could 'splain me how to do that with confidence. I really would love to empty my laptop and put only the bare bones back in there. I just gotta believe it could go a little faster than it does, but I'm always afraid to delete things I don't understand for fear it will make some other stuff not work.

But won't anything make it faster on the ol' cell phone hook up out in the wilderness. You ever been on line at 4800bps? Makes you appreciate even the worst dial-up service. :)

02-03-2002, 12:13 AM
I wish I could explain it also..thing is windows is so goofy that and the complicated driver issues you will have to deal with. You would most diffenatly be without a laptop till you can find a geek to help you I am afaid.
The only way to learn is to do it. Make sure you have all your drivers for the parts on disc,save all your data on disc and then just do it. Worse case someone will have someone bail you out..Thats how I learned..just try your best then get help after you give up.
If you have another PC with a connection it helps also.

Have boot disk made via add/remove programs(alias start disk).

Reboot with the boot disc in the drive.

Hit start computer with CD-Rom support(Dos loads it own CD drivers so you can use the CD)

then you have DOS prompt

a: goes to a drive
c: goes to c drive and so on

dir c: displays the directory of that drive etc.and so on

fdisk will partition your drive into separate little drives(or one big one).

Then format the drives like this
format c: (if only one drive, repeat for more partitions)

switch to the the d: promt or the (ram(temp) drive number) then type
setup and walla your up and running with a graphical interface.

After windows finishes loading then you load whatever drivers windows did not load.

Thats the basis of it but you need to understand a little about partitioning and loading drivers to. MAny little glitches can pop up on you along the way sometimes.

Or just get linux and run the disc it is ten times easier then Windows to load...all automated these days it is a true plug and play system.

02-04-2002, 09:47 AM
You make it sound so easy, JC.... :)

John, make sure before you start, you test that startup disk (2 out of 3 of mine failed when I needed them, and I had tested them when I made them!), you have all your original program disks - & registration numbers, too...

actually, I think figuring out just what you want/need to save and possibly assembling the original stuff is the most difficult part of the whole mess - though you have some "pro" assistance available, don't you?? (a relative, I thought..) That'll help lots -

For anyone buying a new machine or re-formatting an old, I'd HIGHLY recommend purchasing PC Upgrade Commander. You can choose just how much (or how little) you transfer (or restore), incl programs, settings, folder options, etc. You can transfer one of several ways (back up to disks, via cable, or thru a network, such as what you set up with your router), and it will look as it did before, but will be "lean and mean" again. You do not need your original stuff to restore your programs and drivers. Of course, this will not help you if you have a virus problem, but you will have an option to choose just which portions of your old machine to transfer, so much of the old clutter will not be restored. FAIRLY EASY, and USER FRIENDLY.

And, as to it not being worth the $$ to "steal" the add'l setups for cable (internet) access, here it means an extra $200 per machine for each cable modem, plus a monthly fee. Add to that a router or switch allows you many more potiental benefits than just shared internet access, and it is more complicated than an "either/or" question, IMO.


02-04-2002, 07:07 PM
Nah the extra 5 bucks is if you are using a router..no extra boxes.

02-05-2002, 08:42 AM
Not here in North Jersey, JC - Optimum Online says "two connections, two modems" - so they do not offer the "option" of just paying for add'l IP addresses.

From the FAQs on their site:
Q. Can I hook up two or more computers simultaneously to my cable modem?
A. The present cable modem is designed to be used with one computer at a time. You can, however, get additional modems for your other computers....

So, either you buy the router or switch and split it anyway without telling them, or you pay for extra modems. IMO, the "thief" would not be the consumer in all cases...

And, of course, if you are using it for "business", even a home-based business, the monthly fee is much higher, so even paying the extra fee per month for an add'l IP still would not make you "legal" around here. The same applies for both cable and DSL around here.

John Bridge
02-05-2002, 07:33 PM
No, there's no theft so long as the additional machines, be they TVs or computers, are in the same house. If you go over 5, they start wondering whether you're really a business.

02-08-2002, 12:01 AM
A little networking intro for the curious.

Your network provider (be it DSL or Cable) is providing a network connection to an IP address. The speed of the connection is limited by your provider and network conditions. Technically, they don't care how many computers you have as long as you're using one IP address. They're also controlling how much bandwidth you use regardless of the number of machines attached.

The router connects to the DSL/Cable network and looks like a single computer with a single IP address. It provides a second set of connection(s) that allow you to create a private network of your own computers using private IP addresses for each computer that the network provider never knows about. The home "router" often includes a gateway, switch, wireless access point, etc. all in one package.

Technically speaking it doesn't matter how many computers you have connected to your DSL/Cable provider as long as you use a "router" - the provider sees a single machine connected to it. Your service contract may require you to pay for each PC you connect to the network, but that's a business (not technical) issue.

The neighbor issue is similar. With 802.11b wireless access, there's no such notion as a "house". You're just providing wireless network communication within a given range of your wireless access point. Again, your contract may require you to pay for each connected machine but technically it looks like one PC connected to the provider as long as you are shielded behind a router.

I recommend you go to this site to check how well your "router" or other security layer is working:
Go right to the "Test my Shield" and "Probe my Ports" buttons.

02-08-2002, 02:23 AM

Perhaps "technically speaking", 'they' don't care...but my cable company sure as heck does!! If they come in to inspect their equipment (in that "fine print" of theirs) and there are more computers hooked up than you are paying for you are liable for extra fees, plus they have the right to disconnect you. They had the same policy with multiple cable boxes, and in this area, they send technicians out on a regular basis any more. They also take usage readings.

Sorry, my friend, but the cable company considers that "theft of service". Remember, they are guaranteeing a certain minimum speed, and with cable the more users the slower the speed for everyone. And, my office is alongside my home. They refused to install a connection in the "office" portion, unless I signed up for commercial service. Verizon (local telephone co. dsl) has similar restrictions. You can get up to 5 e-mail accounts, but not 5 machines here. Maybe we are just more populated here, or the companies are just not so consumer friendly as in other areas of the country, but the "rules" seem to be different here, at the very least as far as enforcement.


02-08-2002, 08:59 AM
No argument here. If your company limits the number of machines and you exceed it, that's theft of service. I'm just saying that this is a business limitation, not a technical one, and the rules vary from provider to provider.

02-08-2002, 06:42 PM
Yea mine wants an additional five bucks..prolly so cheap becuase they know they can't catch you anyways..

Most of the cable guys I have met could care less if you are stealing cable.. I actually had a cable modem installed while I had free TV cable spiced off on the pole. He just said don't let his boss see it.
So I asked what would happen..he said they would most likely just shut it off.

02-09-2002, 07:49 PM
If your system didn't pass the GRC "test my shields" test, here's a decent firewall router for $52.00 on-line:

Here's a good site that reviews such hardware:

02-09-2002, 09:43 PM
Take the fun out of evrything :D

02-09-2002, 11:03 PM
I did all the GRC tests again yesterday (ZoneAlarm). All pass no problem.

John Bridge
02-10-2002, 06:50 PM
Well . . . .

Maybe we can re -"frame" the scenario here. To connect to a router you have to have a modem, which in turn is connected to a telephone line or a cable.

What would your telephone company think if you hard-wired your "network" to the other houses on your street -- as in "hey, there's no sense in all of us paying a phone bill."

Please give me a break. I'm not too swift when it comes to technical issues, but laws are fairly easy. If it seems to be fraud, it probably is.

02-10-2002, 08:42 PM
That sounds like a Party Line. About the only way to get a phone when Ma Bell was a teenager. Most people couldn't wait to get rid of it.

02-10-2002, 09:05 PM
Yep, when I was a teenager, there were five other houses on our phone line. Only rich folks could have their own line, and that certainly didn't include anybody I knew.

When I asked about this in the first place, I didn't wanna know how to steal nothin'! Fact is, with our little rinky-dink coop local phone company, my neighbor can get some DSL but I can't, so I was afixin' to share his. But he didn't get some anyway. And if I could get my own, I wouldn't on accounta they require you let them be your ISP, your long distance provider, plus a couple other things besides allowing you to pay a little more for the same poor service you've grown accustomed to.

See, even out here in the sticks we have choice. You can choose to have a phone or not. :D

John Bridge
02-11-2002, 06:05 PM
Well my little rinky dink phone company is now my ISP (ma bell -- southwestern bell, actually), and that's no problem, because with DSL you're connected all the time. Turn on your computer and you're there.

As far as long distance is concerned, that's really not an issue anymore. There are a bunch of companies you can use in the sticks or elsewhere that charge a nickle a minute day and night.

DSL sets you free. Both my son and I can surf at warp speed simultaneously now.

02-11-2002, 07:01 PM
Nickel a minute? That could add up fast. A while back I mentioned satellite, did anyone check it out?

02-11-2002, 07:02 PM
Perhaps I don't make myself clear (Well! That's never happened before). Where I live there is only one option if you want a phone, and that is a little coop called GVTC (Guadalupe Valley Telephone Coop). They the onliest ones got phone lines, which they have made some effort to upgrade in the past few years, I'll admit.

But even though they are technically a coop, their rates are not at all competitive. I have the option of selecting my long distance carrier, which is AT&T, same company that I use for wireless service. GVTC can't seem to do better than 15 cents a minute for long distance, and they even screw up the other services I could get from AT&T (who WANTS me to have the services) because of a billing agreement with AT&T (long story). GVTC does provide ISP, and now they have DSL available to some places, but, again, you MUST change all you other phone services to them in order to participate in the DSL service, for which they also want premium dinero I'm told.

Not only would that piss me off if it were being done by a regular phone company, but it pisses me off even more when it's done by a coop, which is a non-profit and is allegedly there to serve its members. Plenty times I do indeed feel serviced. :mad:

02-11-2002, 09:07 PM
My earlier post is being taken incorrectly. No theft is recommended, suggested or condoned.

I saw one/more posts that suggested there is a physical limit to the number of computers that could be connected to a network. The limitations of DSL/Cable are business limitations. I was simply trying to define the technical limitations.

Don't think you can't have X computers on the network because DSL/Cable won't support it. It's simply a matter of finding the right provider and plan. Some locations have limited service and every plan may be restrictive.

I've got an eight node Ethernet network running through my house and my internet provider is cool with it.

02-11-2002, 09:27 PM
We didn't misunderstand, we're just a mischeivous group by nature. :D

02-13-2002, 03:03 PM
Ooops! Talkin' to me, PB?? If so, my turn to clarify - I was not insinuating that you were condoning theft - just saying that it didn't matter how many machines I "can" hook up, the fact remains it is a moot point - cable co wants me to do it "their" way ('cause, of course, they charge over $200 per modem, plus monthly fees), or else they consider me a "thief". It doesn't matter that I am only using one machine at a time, either - and in that scenario, I think they are robbing me, not vice versa.


John Bridge
02-14-2002, 05:41 PM
The router works great, and I have two more available slots in it in case I want to expand. I love the idea of being connected permanently.

James Dibble
03-14-2002, 02:35 PM
I might be able to help John, I work on this stuff for a living or sometimes dieing as the case may be. I don't mess with the wireless stuff much. Last I heard they are not up to 10 meg yet but I could be wrong. I use a Netgear at home with my Verizon DSL (49.95/mo.). DSL is a dedicated speed, cablemodem you share the network with other users so more users on the network the less speed you get. I can't remember the model # of the Netgear right now but there is basically two kinds. One (the one I have) has one etherport which I connect to an ethernet switch that has 16 ports (10/100 meg). It cost me about 100 dollars. For about 150 dollars Netgear has one that has a built in 4 port ethernet hub. You connect one PC or device per port. It is pretty much plug and play. It uses this thing that is called DHCP which provides pretty good security (when you are on the net you need to keep the hackers out). You can go to http://www.buynetgear.com for their online store.

Hope this helps

03-14-2002, 05:17 PM
How about this http://dc.internet.com/news/article/0,,2101_991361,00.html

New way to screw us and I should worry about what's legal? I won't do anything but it sure gets tempting.

John Bridge
03-14-2002, 05:18 PM
Thanks, James, but I have hooked up with the lesser equipment, which consists of the modem the phone company sent me and the router I bought at Comp USA for about $50. No router switch, per se.

It works great. Fast as lightening right now. I am aware that things can slow down in future. I'm figuring the phone company will stay up to snuff on that -- or we'll shop for an alternative, which is what American consumers do.

I do feel sorry for CX. He doesn't seem to be in America. :)

03-14-2002, 05:25 PM
Your point is well taken, John, but to be a good deal more serious, CX feels to a very large extent that none of us is in America any more. :(

But that's probably fodder better suited to the new History Channel, eh?

03-14-2002, 05:27 PM
The link in my previous post won't work here's the article from Internetnews.com Just wait until they start to exploit the loopholes.

FCC Takes Major Step Toward Deregulating Broadband
By Roy Mark

WASHINGTON -- The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved a rule change this morning reclassifying broadband via cable modem as an "information service," freeing the cable industry from regulations that typically are applied to "telecommunications services," including making access to their lines available to competing Internet service providers.

The rule change is the first of several championed by FCC Chairman Michael Powell as a fast track to greater broadband deployment. In February, the Commission issued for comment a proposed rule that would reclassify telephone-based broadband Internet access services that critics contend will essentially establish DSL service as a monopoly of the Baby Bells.

Thursday's reclassification will allow the cable companies, the nation's largest suppliers of broadband service, to avoid previous regulatory obligations, including nondiscriminatory interconnection and carriage, fair contribution to the support of universal service and availability of advanced telecommunications to individuals with disabilities.

The rule change is likely to spark a round of contentious legal challenges from state regulatory authorities since, as an information service, the cable industry will contend it is exempt from local franchise fees it currently pays for the right to deliver Internet service to a community. The industry already pays fees of up to five percent of its gross revenues to local franchise authorities for rights to deliver television service.

Commissioner Michael Copps, who also opposes the February DSL action, was the lone dissenting vote on Thursday's rule change.

"Just one month ago, the Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding the classification of broadband services delivered by wireline providers. I dissented from that Notice and expressed concern that some might read that Notice and conclude that the Commission had a predetermined agenda to deregulate dominant providers in the market," Copps said. "The spate of newspaper stories and magazine articles in the intervening month bears out the concern that I expressed. Many analysts and observers have concluded exactly that."

Copps said he could not support the rule change because it creates "dangerous uncertainty in the growing market for cable broadband services."

An FCC source told Internetnews.com, however, that critics of Thursday's rule change and February's proposed changes for DSL carriers have a shortsighted vision of the future.

"It's not an implausible scenario that instead of having three or four choices of an ISP offered by the cable or telephone companies, consumers will have three or four choices for broadband of which two would be telephone or cable," the source said. "Wireless and satellite services will also be offering broadband services. Our critics seem to think telephone and cable are going to the consumers' only two choices of broadband."

February's proposed rule change would classify Internet service providers as "information services with a telecommunications component," rather than their current status as a telecommunications service. As proposed by the FCC, information services would include voice mail and e-mail, which ride over telecommunications facilities.

Currently, incumbent local exchange carriers must interconnect with local telephone and broadband Internet providers on a non-discriminatory basis under open-access, common carrier rules. Critics fear the proposed new rules will remove the access requirement from the still-growing DSL broadband industry, and further shift market power to the four remaining incumbent local exchange carriers.

"Not only does this classification misconstrue Congress' intentions in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, it threatens to create a regulatory black hole for high-speed Internet services, leaving both local and federal authorities unable to protect public interest concerns in an increasingly centralized industry," said Jeffrey Chester, the executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy.

Dr. Mark Cooper, research director of the Consumer Federation of America, added, "The FCC's decision is fatally flawed and will not provide a workable framework for promoting the deployment of advanced telecommunications capabilities. This policy will undermine the open communications environment that applications developers and content suppliers need to drive innovation, and citizens need to enjoy vibrant civic discourse."

March 14, 2002

[Edited by flatfloor on 03-14-2002 at 06:34 PM]

John Bridge
03-15-2002, 07:33 AM
When government agencies talk about "deregulation," what they often mean is that they want to poke their nose into areas that have hitherto been denied to them. In other words, they want to regulate.

03-15-2002, 05:19 PM
Well we derugulated AT&T out of business and within another year or two it will be back, just with a new name. Merge-merge-merge. Interestingly, nobody in the Justice Dept. or the FCC has noticed.