[82888] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NETGEAR in the core...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Robert Boyle)
Sat Jul 30 23:55:03 2005
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2005 23:54:34 -0400
To: Henry Yen <henry@AegisInfoSys.com>, nanog@merit.edu
From: Robert Boyle <robert@tellurian.com>
In-Reply-To: <20050730233232.P7335@AegisInfoSys.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
At 11:32 PM 7/30/2005, Henry Yen wrote:
>On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 10:11:28AM -0400, Robert Boyle wrote:
> > >I'm interested in people's experiences with consumer-grade routers
> > >functioning in non-NAT mode; that is to say, running PPPoE to the ISP
> > >and routing a /29 or a /28. A sane filtering language and stateful
> > >firewall that can operate in non-NAT mode is a plus.
>
> > http://www.cyberguard.com/products/firewall/SG_Family/
>
>I think linux runs inside those. Vendor-supplied, yes, but if the OP
>wants to avoid linux altogether...
That's correct. It is claimed to be quite hardened. We have around one
hundred of their 550 and 575 boxes deployed and they seem to work pretty
well although I prefer the PIX. The SG can do much more, but the PIX does
what it does better.
>No personal experience, but could a LinkSys/WRT45g with
>custom linux load be even cheaper?
Probably.
>Can a cisco 1600 run PPPoE?
I've never tried it, but if they can run 12.2, they should do PPPoE.
R
Tellurian Networks - The Ultimate Internet Connection
http://www.tellurian.com | 888-TELLURIAN | 973-300-9211
"Well done is better than well said." - Benjamin Franklin
