Quote:
Originally posted by gonk:
I can see the attraction, but I worry that the cost (which will not be insignificant) will essentially be a penalty to the customers who don't need it.
They could cut costs by including a single wireless card and one ethernet port. You could then connect one component to the ethernet port to utilize the wireless or connect a hub or switch and connect multiple devices.

There's various forms of embeded linux that use parts of LEAF as their primary dhcp, firewall, nat etc. They have a very small footprint. Even Linkys/Cisco uses linux. You wouldn't even have to use the entire package, but mainly iptables.
Quote:
This intrigued me because I have messed with wireless bridging (using a Linksys access point that was a pain to set up as both access point and bridge), so I started hunting around for some detail on purpose-built wireless bridges. My biggest question was how you handle configuring wireless encryption (WEP or WPA, presumably).
The Linksys WAP54G cannot or could not do WPA between two access points with a bridge. It could only to WEP with a hexidecimal key. It also only worked with another linksys access point or a WRT54G. They kept saying they would release a firmware fix, but it never materialized. I think the latest is 3.04.

You could use WPA with an access point as a repeater or as an access point client.

Quote:
I wanted to see the instructions for setting up a bridge. I may be overlooking something really simple out there, but what I found included the discontinued Linksys WET11 (which I remember seeing years ago), a replacement Linksys with some poor reviews on Amazon.com, a review of an SMC bridge that was pretty critical of the tedious setup procedure, and this D-Link unit that actually does exactly what we are talking about: a wireless bridge (assuming you set the rear panel switch to "bridge" instead of "AP") with four ports.
I hear your pain. shocked

Quote:
The manual is close to 100 pages long, and the section talking about the bridge mode spent ten pages talking about how to set it up (logging in through a browser, entering the name of the access point, entering in a pin or other security code, and so forth). That's where I get concerned about Outlaw trying to integrate all of that into a surround processor: they will be the ones fielding calls from folks trying to configure the unit to work with dozens of different access points and network setups. The impact on their customer support resources could be painful if the feature actually saw heavy use. On the bright side, I did also find a D-Link gaming bridge (DGL-3420) with instructions that seemed more straightforward. I still think about the potential pitfalls some folks will encounter when messing with wireless networking (I've provided some free phone support for folks with wireless networks and in at least one case found that it never did quite get set up right, which may be contributing to my skittishness).
You definitely don't need to have it as complicated as a linksys or D-link router or anything like that. They take it to the extreme.

It can be setup with just a few options. DHCP or STATIC IP for wireless or ethernet. Inernet connection sharing shares the wireless connection only with only DHCP option and if necessary the ability to designate a router IP address, if necessary. That's to say if you're home wireless network consists of more than one network and you need to configure it to 10.0.0.0, 172.16.0.0 or 192.168.0.0 etc Obviously this would be advanced with very minimal options. Basically once you check share internet connection it automatically creates another network as DHCP through the ethernet port. No static addressing or firewalls.

You'd have:
  • Wireless:
  • Search for access point or wireless router.
  • Select ap/router name and enter WEP/WPA key. (saved)
  • Use DHCP or manually enter IP address checkbox.
  • Share internet connection
    • Advanced Options
    • Enter IP addressing


Option:
Wired:
  • DHCP or Manual Address (no shared networking with this option)



Quote:
True enough. I don't dislike the idea - it really is a cool concept - I just worry that actually trying to do it (especially for a smaller company that does their own customer support) could be opening a can of worms that would cost them heavily, plus the potential first cost passed along to the customer. If D-Link is charging $100 to $130 for a device like this that's tucked into a plastic box when they have the benefit of shared R&D, the cost savings of tucking it inside an existing chassis is likely to be almost zero.
I hear what you're saying. Fortunately most of the code is available on the web and is open source. Most of linksys code is opensource, It's just a matter of stripping out all the options giving the uses just a handful of options and automating a few tasks. No web interface or anything like that. You'll already have some security with your home wireless router etc.