Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[xco]

I have a modem and my dgl-4500 in my network. I want to know which is the better configuration and for what reason.

Config 1) Router connected to the modem, but have the modem assign it an IP address and handle the DHCP clients. Have my network computers connected to my router, with the router set to use its own DHCP pool.

Config 2) Router connected to the modem, but have my router act like a modem (use the username/password function).  Have my network computers connected to the router, again using DHCP.

Reason for this? The dgl-4500 has superior functionality, management and security features compared to my modem but I want to know if it makes any substantial difference on those criteria. THANKS for reading this!

[FurryNutz]

It's preferred that your ISP modem hand off a public IP address to the 4500 router and have the router handle any and all routing of Internet and traffic shaping and client IP address management. My 2 cents. 

[Hard Harry]

Thats actually a pretty good question a lot of people don't consider, so Kudos. Basically, your question is which device should do the PPPoE handshake(or what ever protocol you use)? The modem or the router. That would depend on a lot of things. Lets start with this:

1. What kind of modem do you have?
2. ISP
3. Protocol and configuration if you happen to know.

Also, I am probably just going to Google it because some of it will be trial and error depending on the modem and the systems in place as your ISP level.

[xco]

Thanks Furry, that is what I have it currently set to. I like ur 2 cents lol

Thats actually a pretty good question a lot of people don't consider, so Kudos. Basically, your question is which device should do the PPPoE handshake(or what ever protocol you use)? The modem or the router. That would depend on a lot of things. Lets start with this:

1. What kind of modem do you have?
2. ISP
3. Protocol and configuration if you happen to know.

Also, I am probably just going to Google it because some of it will be trial and error depending on the modem and the systems in place as your ISP level.

Sure 1) I have a 2Wire 2701Hg-g modem 2) I have bell sympatico i think its DSL. 3) I am not quite sure what you mean but its a PPPoE with the username/password configuration.

[FurryNutz]

DSL uses a protocol called PPPoE that there modems use to connect to there services. Just mainly a user name and pw based system to authenticate the modem and account with the ISP service. Mainly used by DSL systems. Cable uses more simple MAC address and IP address DHCP system to connect. Let us know what you go with on your configuration.

[Hard Harry]

My question was, even if you already answer his question ::grin:: is what does the PPPoE handshake better? The modem or the 4500. From looking around (only for a bit though) looks like its better for the 4500 to do it, since you have more direct control of it. If its possible is a different matter, and that depends on the firmware loaded by the ISP Bell seems to lock it down and you can only trick it by putting a fake PW in to the modem so it fails the PPPoE and then have the 4500 do the handshake. I was hoping someone here would be able to test though. Here is a post with more info.  But if you do a google search like this you will find similar threads. Both ways will work, but setting the modem to full bridge (not just DHCP and NAT, but disabling PPPoE too) give some better performance. Let me know how your results are though.

[xco]

Success! I chose config 2.

I looked at some of those links you posted...very interesting but from the posts I read the firmware is "locked", only tech's no the passwords to unlock it. Bridge mode would have been ideal but my current configuration is up; using my router as the PPPoE thing.

1 thing though...I cant do remote desktop (nothing on windows side; all comps allow remote desktop)??

[Hard Harry]

Yea, that is to be expected. Its because without the modem set to transparent (or equivalent) your behind dual NAT. Thats a fancy way of saying remote, P2P, and other such applications that require port forwarding or port switching, are a pain in the neck. Have you called your ISP and confirmed there is no access to the modem's settings?

A good way of thinking of it is you work in a office with a secretary. When your make outgoing calls, you dial number, and the person picks up, no problem(AKA you can get online) But if someone wants to call you, they only have your company number, which goes to your secretary's desk. The secretary is like the 4500. You can tell them that when you get calls from a certain someone, to transfer them to your office, and thus port forwarding with just one router is fine. But say if your secretary has their own secretary? Your secretary's secretary just leaves messages, so the call's aren't routed to your offices properly. Now you can set it up so they are, but just like in real life, the more people you have in the chain, the more complicated it gets. Hope that helps.

[xco]

yes your analogy makes perfect sense. I havent actually called them and asked about the settings, I shall do so soon.

so if i understand correctly i need to open ports on both the devices. I can open individual ports on both, which isn't a problem but this configuration doesn't allow me to access the modems GUI. Not unless I do a manual connection with on the PC's to the router. That what I suspect at least because I cannot get anyone to connect to my teamspeak server

[Hard Harry]

Basically yes. I think you may need to set port forwarding on both, and port triggering on one, but I will have to research before I am sure. Have to get to work though, I should have some time later today.