 




<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Routers for cable connection with print sharing.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/routers-for-cable-connection-with-print-sharing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/routers-for-cable-connection-with-print-sharing/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 14:10:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: techsoldier</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/routers-for-cable-connection-with-print-sharing/#comment-97945</link>
		<dc:creator>techsoldier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2011 17:05:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-97945</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The wireless routers can provide multiple LAN connections that can be made or be used for wireless capabilities depending on what you buy. And if you hook two computers up then you not always have to worry about the internet slowing down]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The wireless routers can provide multiple LAN connections that can be made or be used for wireless capabilities depending on what you buy. And if you hook two computers up then you not always have to worry about the internet slowing down</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tangor64</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/routers-for-cable-connection-with-print-sharing/#comment-38002</link>
		<dc:creator>tangor64</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:36:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-38002</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[To add to my last post...
Use a Router. neither hubs nor switches have built in DHCP. This service assigns the address that identifies your computer on the network. If you rely on one of them, you will have to purchase an additional IP address from your provider. The router will take the 1 IP address the ISP gives you and masks all your equipment behind it. Your equipment, printers and all, will rely on addresses given it by the router. It&#039;ll save you money and headaches in the long run.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To add to my last post&#8230;<br />
Use a Router. neither hubs nor switches have built in DHCP. This service assigns the address that identifies your computer on the network. If you rely on one of them, you will have to purchase an additional IP address from your provider. The router will take the 1 IP address the ISP gives you and masks all your equipment behind it. Your equipment, printers and all, will rely on addresses given it by the router. It&#8217;ll save you money and headaches in the long run.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tangor64</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/routers-for-cable-connection-with-print-sharing/#comment-38003</link>
		<dc:creator>tangor64</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:25:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-38003</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wholesome is correct, Dogbreff is not, sort of.
Running multiple devices through a router (NOT a hub) should not degrade your individual performance. Theoratically, a router with DHCP is capable of controlling the data from 253 devices. I wouldn&#039;t put that kind of load on a home network and would expect performance degredation long before that number, but it&#039;s theoratically possible.
I&#039;ve had the best results from the Linksys WRT54G. It&#039;s got both a 4 port wired router and wireless, which can be disabled if you want. I wouldn&#039;t use wireless for online gaming because of the lower speed, but I know people who do and have no problems.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wholesome is correct, Dogbreff is not, sort of.<br />
Running multiple devices through a router (NOT a hub) should not degrade your individual performance. Theoratically, a router with DHCP is capable of controlling the data from 253 devices. I wouldn&#8217;t put that kind of load on a home network and would expect performance degredation long before that number, but it&#8217;s theoratically possible.<br />
I&#8217;ve had the best results from the Linksys WRT54G. It&#8217;s got both a 4 port wired router and wireless, which can be disabled if you want. I wouldn&#8217;t use wireless for online gaming because of the lower speed, but I know people who do and have no problems.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: marcola</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/routers-for-cable-connection-with-print-sharing/#comment-38004</link>
		<dc:creator>marcola</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:58:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-38004</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It is fairly easy to harden your wirless environment by doing 3 simple things.

1.  Disable SSID broadcast.
2.  Enable WPA (not WEP)128bit or higher encryption.
3.  Capture the MAC address of each of your machines and add them to the access list in your router.

The pluses are the hackers cannot see your network ID,  WPA is much stronger than WEP and tougher to crack and if they break the first two the router will only allow the MAC addresses defined to connect.


]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is fairly easy to harden your wirless environment by doing 3 simple things.</p>
<p>1.  Disable SSID broadcast.<br />
2.  Enable WPA (not WEP)128bit or higher encryption.<br />
3.  Capture the MAC address of each of your machines and add them to the access list in your router.</p>
<p>The pluses are the hackers cannot see your network ID,  WPA is much stronger than WEP and tougher to crack and if they break the first two the router will only allow the MAC addresses defined to connect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jamnthis1</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/routers-for-cable-connection-with-print-sharing/#comment-38005</link>
		<dc:creator>jamnthis1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 08:55:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-38005</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wireless is out of the question.  I read an article last year about a guy that would drive around in his car and pick up people&#039;s wireless signals to hack into thier personal information.  The gov. is already invading our privacy with large companies cooperation, I don&#039;t want everyone to have access.  

Basically, I just need to get a Netgear 4 port switch with a printer port if possible.  Are Netgear routers easy to configure and maintain.  Updates etc.?  

Network diagnostics; would this be to monitor what web pages are being looked at or to determine if someone is trying to gain access.  One other thing I need to be able to do is prevent access to specific websites.  I would like to do a broad range and specific sites.  I don&#039;t want this to be permenante.  If it does a broad range of sites like porn I want to be able to view and edit the list.  Is this part of the network sniffing that is being referred too?  I would really prefer not to buy a software to do this and it has to be something that only I know about.  Explorer options are easily changed in here.  It needs to be the super secret site blocker.  Friends come over that know enough about computers to be dangerous and passwords ect. are easily obtained by them.  I need to make sure it is a super super secret back door entrance.  Send private message if nessasary. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wireless is out of the question.  I read an article last year about a guy that would drive around in his car and pick up people&#8217;s wireless signals to hack into thier personal information.  The gov. is already invading our privacy with large companies cooperation, I don&#8217;t want everyone to have access.  </p>
<p>Basically, I just need to get a Netgear 4 port switch with a printer port if possible.  Are Netgear routers easy to configure and maintain.  Updates etc.?  </p>
<p>Network diagnostics; would this be to monitor what web pages are being looked at or to determine if someone is trying to gain access.  One other thing I need to be able to do is prevent access to specific websites.  I would like to do a broad range and specific sites.  I don&#8217;t want this to be permenante.  If it does a broad range of sites like porn I want to be able to view and edit the list.  Is this part of the network sniffing that is being referred too?  I would really prefer not to buy a software to do this and it has to be something that only I know about.  Explorer options are easily changed in here.  It needs to be the super secret site blocker.  Friends come over that know enough about computers to be dangerous and passwords ect. are easily obtained by them.  I need to make sure it is a super super secret back door entrance.  Send private message if nessasary. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: technochic</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/routers-for-cable-connection-with-print-sharing/#comment-38006</link>
		<dc:creator>technochic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Aug 2006 17:21:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-38006</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Getting back to the original question, I have this set-up at my house:

7 computers and a networked printer on a home network.

We are using a linksys wireless router with a 4-port switch connected to the cable modem, and an additional 6 port switch connected to the router to get everyone networked together. BTW, I did not have to make any configuration changes on the cable modem whatsoever.

My ISP only provides one IP to us, so in order to get it to work, I had to clone the IP address of the first computer set up by my ISP into the router advanced configuration page. Do you know how long it took me to find out that was the reason I could only get on line with that one computer? I was amazed that none of my network admin friends could tell me that&#039;s what I needed to do! I think I actually stumbled on it myself, but that&#039;s not new to me.

Anyway, yes the Linksys router provides the DHCP function that allows us all to get on line. And I can tell you, at least at my house, we can have two kids gaming, and one listening to streaming music at the same time and none of them complain about slow speeds at any time. Meanwhile, I&#039;ll be browsing or checking email and I don&#039;t notice any issues either. 

Happy computing all!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Getting back to the original question, I have this set-up at my house:</p>
<p>7 computers and a networked printer on a home network.</p>
<p>We are using a linksys wireless router with a 4-port switch connected to the cable modem, and an additional 6 port switch connected to the router to get everyone networked together. BTW, I did not have to make any configuration changes on the cable modem whatsoever.</p>
<p>My ISP only provides one IP to us, so in order to get it to work, I had to clone the IP address of the first computer set up by my ISP into the router advanced configuration page. Do you know how long it took me to find out that was the reason I could only get on line with that one computer? I was amazed that none of my network admin friends could tell me that&#8217;s what I needed to do! I think I actually stumbled on it myself, but that&#8217;s not new to me.</p>
<p>Anyway, yes the Linksys router provides the DHCP function that allows us all to get on line. And I can tell you, at least at my house, we can have two kids gaming, and one listening to streaming music at the same time and none of them complain about slow speeds at any time. Meanwhile, I&#8217;ll be browsing or checking email and I don&#8217;t notice any issues either. </p>
<p>Happy computing all!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mortree</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/routers-for-cable-connection-with-print-sharing/#comment-38007</link>
		<dc:creator>mortree</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Aug 2006 12:22:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-38007</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why guess about existing wireless usage? 


Low-end Wireless routers are cheap ($50-$80). Buy one and try it with one machine until you get a feel for whether it meets your needs. Failure is only mild irritation for most people.

Better yet borrow wireless gear for a couple days test.

If you already have or can borrow a wireless card or equipped laptop -- just open  the XP wireless configuration. You can see the majority of wireless networks near enough to potentially compete. You won&#039;t see networks where people turned off SSIDs for security reasons. If you see less than 5 networks on Friday night and Saturaday afternoon you should be able to find some  channel free of competition though not necessarily the fastest. 


My point has not been that wireless fails frequently -- but rather that, unless you live far from neighbors, poor suitablity is unpredictable and certainly not unknown.


I would avoid committing to buying several cards or an upper end wireless router/firewall until you&#039;ve tested where your local conditions meet your needs. You can get into several hundred dollars if you have several machine and go upper end name brand. 
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why guess about existing wireless usage? </p>
<p>Low-end Wireless routers are cheap ($50-$80). Buy one and try it with one machine until you get a feel for whether it meets your needs. Failure is only mild irritation for most people.</p>
<p>Better yet borrow wireless gear for a couple days test.</p>
<p>If you already have or can borrow a wireless card or equipped laptop &#8212; just open  the XP wireless configuration. You can see the majority of wireless networks near enough to potentially compete. You won&#8217;t see networks where people turned off SSIDs for security reasons. If you see less than 5 networks on Friday night and Saturaday afternoon you should be able to find some  channel free of competition though not necessarily the fastest. </p>
<p>My point has not been that wireless fails frequently &#8212; but rather that, unless you live far from neighbors, poor suitablity is unpredictable and certainly not unknown.</p>
<p>I would avoid committing to buying several cards or an upper end wireless router/firewall until you&#8217;ve tested where your local conditions meet your needs. You can get into several hundred dollars if you have several machine and go upper end name brand. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mortree</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/routers-for-cable-connection-with-print-sharing/#comment-38008</link>
		<dc:creator>mortree</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Aug 2006 10:36:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-38008</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wireless data transfer is highly reliable - as long as transfer occurs at all. 

I&#039;d endorse wireless for any office application where information wasn&#039;t confidential as smooth data delivery isn&#039;t an issue. You will never know it slowed dramatically  in the middle. Overall all speed usually doesn&#039;t change enough to be very noticable.

Wireless is practically mandatory for apartments and temporary LAN parties.

Wireless does work for all but the most serious gaming purposes if you chose the right locations to place machines and access points. The key points are serious gamers might find occasional momentary slowdowns disrupts gameplay and you can&#039;t always put stuff where you want due to walls, fluorescent lights etc. 




You will want good desktop security for PCs on wireless networks in the long term to avoid desktop hacking...unless you don&#039;t care.  It is true that modern worms and viruses no longer routinely cripple your machine, instead preferring to steal useage for illegal purposes (spam, zombie attacks on public websites, etc). Professional security source say 90% of home machines are infested and that 75% of those do not know -- implying 23% of all home machine user know they are infected and either don&#039;t care or can&#039;t afford.


Alternatively you won&#039;t have any serious wireless security issues if you have both wireless and wired LANS using two firewalls (one each LAN) and multiple external ISP IPs. Then you keep all gaming machines on the wireless network and serious home banking, etc machines in the wired LAN.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wireless data transfer is highly reliable &#8211; as long as transfer occurs at all. </p>
<p>I&#8217;d endorse wireless for any office application where information wasn&#8217;t confidential as smooth data delivery isn&#8217;t an issue. You will never know it slowed dramatically  in the middle. Overall all speed usually doesn&#8217;t change enough to be very noticable.</p>
<p>Wireless is practically mandatory for apartments and temporary LAN parties.</p>
<p>Wireless does work for all but the most serious gaming purposes if you chose the right locations to place machines and access points. The key points are serious gamers might find occasional momentary slowdowns disrupts gameplay and you can&#8217;t always put stuff where you want due to walls, fluorescent lights etc. </p>
<p>You will want good desktop security for PCs on wireless networks in the long term to avoid desktop hacking&#8230;unless you don&#8217;t care.  It is true that modern worms and viruses no longer routinely cripple your machine, instead preferring to steal useage for illegal purposes (spam, zombie attacks on public websites, etc). Professional security source say 90% of home machines are infested and that 75% of those do not know &#8212; implying 23% of all home machine user know they are infected and either don&#8217;t care or can&#8217;t afford.</p>
<p>Alternatively you won&#8217;t have any serious wireless security issues if you have both wireless and wired LANS using two firewalls (one each LAN) and multiple external ISP IPs. Then you keep all gaming machines on the wireless network and serious home banking, etc machines in the wired LAN.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mortree</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/routers-for-cable-connection-with-print-sharing/#comment-38009</link>
		<dc:creator>mortree</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Aug 2006 09:49:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-38009</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you care about wireless security --
open your eyes as to what the grey (shady) guys are doing. 
The black (pure evil) guys are of course more advanced than this and I am not distributing links. 

Common software downloads

http://www.wardriving.com/code.php
(Note the WPA cracking module for unfixed WPA and the GPS mapping software for distributing street location and database of cracked keys)


http://www.wifimaps.com/
Of course commercial sites are more heavily reported than residenctial because commercial access points are more likely to be long-lived. Plus they have better Internet service on average. Plenty of home wireless only has dialup. Still homes are sometimes reported.


Wardriving is probably not much of a risk in farmland communities of 5000...though even small towns can have geeks. Any college town or city of 30000 is practically guaranteed some regular activity. But even major metropolitan cities have large areas that are &quot;unmined&quot; (gunfire distracts geeks).
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you care about wireless security &#8211;<br />
open your eyes as to what the grey (shady) guys are doing.<br />
The black (pure evil) guys are of course more advanced than this and I am not distributing links. </p>
<p>Common software downloads</p>
<p><a href="http://www.wardriving.com/code.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.wardriving.com/code.php</a><br />
(Note the WPA cracking module for unfixed WPA and the GPS mapping software for distributing street location and database of cracked keys)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.wifimaps.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.wifimaps.com/</a><br />
Of course commercial sites are more heavily reported than residenctial because commercial access points are more likely to be long-lived. Plus they have better Internet service on average. Plenty of home wireless only has dialup. Still homes are sometimes reported.</p>
<p>Wardriving is probably not much of a risk in farmland communities of 5000&#8230;though even small towns can have geeks. Any college town or city of 30000 is practically guaranteed some regular activity. But even major metropolitan cities have large areas that are &#8220;unmined&#8221; (gunfire distracts geeks).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mortree</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/routers-for-cable-connection-with-print-sharing/#comment-38010</link>
		<dc:creator>mortree</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Aug 2006 09:31:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-38010</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[All good points on wireless. Wireless does work. And do you care about security and reliable performance? You aren&#039;t running a bank (don&#039;t go to bank account over wireless) or broadcasting pay TV. I wouldn&#039;t worry about security if you only have Xboxes on network. 

Yes. If you live in the country or large lot with your nearest neightbor 800 feet away -- no worries. Closest to guaranteed ideal conditions and performance.

Even in the city if on 3-4 families on your block use wireless you should be able to work around things...unless applicances and phones make several wireless channels unuseable for anyone.  

However in the dozen wireless installs I have seen in ordinary neighborhoods (no appartments) -- I usually see 4-12 SSIDs (home wireless networks) depending on day and time. Everyone is getting wireless because it is so cheap. 

Removing SSIDs gets rid of obvious signposts for casual less techncial human intrusion. But crackers can download software (airsnort) that can work around that.



WPA is nice. But by no means crackerproof. WPA with strong &quot;password&quot; was broken on an ordinary home machine in 30 minutes over 3 years ago. The question is whether any kid vandal or adult snoop will let their machine run that long. Its not like the cracker has to do anything besides look for the result. P.S. &quot;weak&quot; user-friendly, easy to enter passwords were cracked in less than 30 seconds in some cases.
 

Just remember that the quoted ideal conditions and performance don&#039;t always apply. Wireless is SHARED media and subject to the problems of public facilities.


]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All good points on wireless. Wireless does work. And do you care about security and reliable performance? You aren&#8217;t running a bank (don&#8217;t go to bank account over wireless) or broadcasting pay TV. I wouldn&#8217;t worry about security if you only have Xboxes on network. </p>
<p>Yes. If you live in the country or large lot with your nearest neightbor 800 feet away &#8212; no worries. Closest to guaranteed ideal conditions and performance.</p>
<p>Even in the city if on 3-4 families on your block use wireless you should be able to work around things&#8230;unless applicances and phones make several wireless channels unuseable for anyone.  </p>
<p>However in the dozen wireless installs I have seen in ordinary neighborhoods (no appartments) &#8212; I usually see 4-12 SSIDs (home wireless networks) depending on day and time. Everyone is getting wireless because it is so cheap. </p>
<p>Removing SSIDs gets rid of obvious signposts for casual less techncial human intrusion. But crackers can download software (airsnort) that can work around that.</p>
<p>WPA is nice. But by no means crackerproof. WPA with strong &#8220;password&#8221; was broken on an ordinary home machine in 30 minutes over 3 years ago. The question is whether any kid vandal or adult snoop will let their machine run that long. Its not like the cracker has to do anything besides look for the result. P.S. &#8220;weak&#8221; user-friendly, easy to enter passwords were cracked in less than 30 seconds in some cases.</p>
<p>Just remember that the quoted ideal conditions and performance don&#8217;t always apply. Wireless is SHARED media and subject to the problems of public facilities.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using memcached
Database Caching 3/10 queries in 0.081 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 393/399 objects using memcached

Served from: itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com @ 2013-05-22 15:00:41 -->