thanks to civileme and frans replies, i have few more questions though, ill just snip and insert wherever appropriate...
On Wed, 23 Jan 2002 09:48:41 -0900 tester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anuerin G. Diaz wrote: > > > <snip> > > SNF is probably overkill unless you have a steady connection (DSL or > cable) to the internet. SNF will _not_ run servers like mail or web--it > is a dedicated firewall. Similarly, no other systems are welcome on the > firewall--it must be dedicated to that purpose. > doesnt the SNF page (i think it was in mandrakesecure) tell that you can do proxy servers, internet sharing, (i think there also was something about web serving) and all that? would you recommend that i download the 7.x distribution and do it from there? > 2.2 was used because we had a reliable 2.2 kernel-secure at production > time. Currently a stateful firewall version is in the makings using > kernel 2.4 and iptables. > > 48M might be a performance hit, but it should work. If you are sharing > a modem or a 128K DSL, you are unlikely to notice the hit. And don't > laugh--I had 15 nodes at a busy government office sharing a 56K modem > and it worked. > thanks. > Cabling? > > Get a switch if at all possible. attach all computers to the switch > using cat5 ethernet cable with RJ45 connectors--do not use the uplink > plug. If you have a hub, you can use that in place of a switch. Your > internet connection is placed separately, from the internet connection > of the firewall. > im planing to get a 4-port hub. ill have to do a little more searching on that uplink plug thing, its more of a black arts to me right now. ;-) > Addressing? > > Local IP addresses are important--unless you have a fair size of system, > just keep them static > thanks, im scared of DNS right now because setting up a network right now is pretty daunting to me. > Addresses can be 192.168.xxx.something where the xxx is the same for all > computers and between 0 and 255 and the something is different for each > computer > > or > 172.16-31.something1.something2 with a netmask of 255.255.0.0 > and the 16-31 choice should be the same for all computers > > or > 10.anything.anything.anything with netmask 255.0.0.0 > > The firewall is set up with some IP address and all other nodes have > that IP as their default gateway. i read somewhere that the 192.168 (the netmask here should be 255.255.0.0 , right?) chain was reserved for home networks. ill just use that since i have no info on the 172 and 10 chains. Am i right in thinking that the firewall would have 2 lan cards, one for the outside connection and the other for sharing the connection thru the hub? im going to test it using dial-up (im still applying for the DSL connection), so that would probably mean that 1 lan card will suffice now since the modem will act as the outside interface. is my logic still sound? > > All computers should have the same DNS addresses, and the best settings > are the DNS IP addresses given by your ISP. > if the dial-up ISP has automatic DNS (i dont put any when connecting in my standalone box), then i can skip this part? i reckon i will have to do this _when_ i get DSL. > Civileme > thank you so much! -- "Programming, an artform that fights back." ============================= Anuerin G. Diaz Design Engineer Millennium Software, Incorporated 2305 B West Tower, Philippines Stocks Exchange Center, Exchange Road, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Tel# 638-3070 loc. 72 Fax# 638-3079 =============================
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
