On 22/01/19 01:11, Thomas Nixon wrote:
On 1/21/19, Bjørn Mork <bj...@mork.no> wrote:
Paul Oranje <p...@oranjevos.nl> writes:
Op 20 jan. 2019, om 17:52 heeft Thomas Nixon <t...@tomn.co.uk> het
volgende geschreven:
I could add a new subtarget like xrx200 but with small_flash enabled, but
this
seems a bit excessive for a single board. The DM200 has generally been a
pain
to support, and there are better options out there, so I wonder if it
makes
more sense to just drop it.
Some people use this modem, so dropping its support will not please
everybody.
Supporting it as a small flash device seems the right approach.
I wonder about those better options... What are they?
In the UK at least BT OpenReach modems are available very cheaply second hand
and are in theory a bit better, for a few reasons.
I'm not sure if all of them can run openwrt, but after some reflection I'm not
that concerned by this. They will do PPPoE so you don't really need to touch
them, and you can consider them to be outside your network. There therefore
isn't a huge security advantage to replacing the OS, especially when they're
running plenty of proprietary firmware in either case.
Hopefully we can keep supporting them anyway.
Thanks,
Tom
If the need was doing a true PPPoA-PPPoE bridge, (i.e. if your line is
PPPoA)
I've used a Draytech Vigor 120 (with stock firmware).
That's this device's main selling point.
I didn't find any other consumer device that can do it.
https://www.draytek.co.uk/products/business/vigor-120
I also agree on the statement that modems in bridging aren't
particularly unsafe given the level in the stack they are working at.
-Alberto
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
