I need your help!!!!

I don't see anything wrong in my post. :whistle:

FAIL!
 
Nathan said:
I do read read the whole post, you know what, it's funny really. It does matter. Business do not use DMZ at all. Many business company use port forward instead of DMZ. DMZ is lazy and easy to use but useless.

GUADRUPLE FAIL.
Click to expand...

JClarke said:
See in bold

That will be more than a quadruple FAIL!
Click to expand...

You changed the spellling, Nathan! :eek3:

That's even worse Global FAIL!


Alright, this is getting old already.
 
Nathan said:
I do read read the whole post, you know what, it's funny really. It does matter. Business do not use DMZ at all. Many business company use port forward instead of DMZ. DMZ is lazy and easy to use but useless.

GUADRUPLE FAIL.
Click to expand...

Sure, Keep talk whatever you want. :roll:
 
DefMATRIXense said:
N is better than G. I tested it with my iPhone wifi ( not sure if it's g or n) and the result is 15mbps and 5mbps. :)
:shock: and I have a huge house four floors and I tested it everywhere in the house even bathroom. It's same result.
Click to expand...

iPhone support G only.
 
JClarke said:
:laugh2:
Click to expand...

Go already to ask your IT if they own the server.

Chevy57 said:
:laugh2:
Click to expand...

Look who laugh that you still think SSD is hard drive and RAM is Hz.

Nathan said:
you reckless moron... :mad2:


:lol:
Click to expand...

That's all you think of videophone or simple. How about server? Web?

Mutli-ISP firewall setup using shorewall and linux to create safe DMZ and LAN access. | Cypris' lookout

Securing Your WHS & Network Part 8 - Home Server Land - Site Root - Home Server Land

Read and learn..

Server already own firewall why need another firewall from router. Double firewalls cause slow down and probably issue to connection.

Do you know how to create different subnet for each hosts in same build?

I bet you don't.
 
Exact the reason why I discourage having multiple routers or devices with built in firewall. Its too much headache.

And about subnetting, not many people understand this and I am not one of them.

I do not want to go very deep around here because it will overwhelm average users.

I have seen misunderstanding over this forum. If stick with same subnetting with multiple routers it will cause more collisions and slow down considerable.

The Highlander said:
Go already to ask your IT if they own the server.



Look who laugh that you still think SSD is hard drive and RAM is Hz.



That's all you think of videophone or simple. How about server? Web?

Mutli-ISP firewall setup using shorewall and linux to create safe DMZ and LAN access. | Cypris' lookout

Securing Your WHS & Network Part 8 - Home Server Land - Site Root - Home Server Land

Read and learn..

Server already own firewall why need another firewall from router. Double firewalls cause slow down and probably issue to connection.

Do you know how to create different subnet for each hosts in same build?

I bet you don't.
Click to expand...
 
diehardbiker said:
Exact the reason why I discourage having multiple routers or devices with built in firewall. Its too much headache.

And about subnetting, not many people understand this and I am not one of them.

I do not want to go very deep around here because it will overwhelm average users.

I have seen misunderstanding over this forum. If stick with same subnetting with multiple routers it will cause more collisions and slow down considerable.
Click to expand...

Finally, I am agreed with you.

Yes, Multi-router with same subnet will collision whole the network. The different subnet is better for LARGE network and more security from LAN users.
twb-subnet-map.jpg


Once you take cisco class and passed then you will finally understand why they do that. They always have more than one switch for fail-safe and very easy to find troubleshooting thru CISCO software.

Here a picture of CISCO software and you noticed they have more than one switch for network.
31374-cisco_snmp_tool.jpg


No, I don't take CISCO class and not interesting it anymore just know a little. My old coworker passed it from last year and he explained to me everything. It's pretty cool and lot to learn.
 
The Highlander said:
Finally, I am agreed with you.

Yes, Multi-router with same subnet will collision whole the network. The different subnet is better for LARGE network and more security from LAN users.
twb-subnet-map.jpg


Once you take cisco class and passed then you will finally understand why they do that. They always have more than one switch for fail-safe and very easy to find troubleshooting thru CISCO software.

Here a picture of CISCO software and you noticed they have more than one switch for network.
31374-cisco_snmp_tool.jpg


No, I don't take CISCO class and not interesting it anymore just know a little. My old coworker passed it from last year and he explained to me everything. It's pretty cool and lot to learn.
Click to expand...
That seems interesting, my friend from Sydney recommends me to do MCSE and CCNA cert self study, which I plan to. I just bought 5 second hand computers (with no monitors) for only $100
 
I have Linksys WRT310N I use DMZ with VP200's MAC ID number and MY VP200 is automatic DHCP I do not need use 192.168.1.125 I have been used it and it works!
 
Last edited:
coolguy1973fla said:
I have Linksys WRT310N I use DMZ with MAC ID number and MY VP200 is automatic DHCP I do not need use 192.168.1.125 I have been used it and it works!
Click to expand...
It will be a different story, if you have multiple videophones all over the house.
 
You misunderstand me, I said if add 2nd VP without solution will face problems. Subnetting will NOT solve the problem. Adding 2nd IP address with switch is A solution to the problem.

DefMATRIXense said:
Not really and all you need is either get a second IP address or switcher with set up a subnetting.
Click to expand...
 
I own the Linksys WRT310N and my VP-200 works fine. Only complaint is that ever since I switched, my VP stopped flashing every time someone calls me. No big deal. :dunno2:
 
I believe that Linksys with CISCO with G should not work (happen to me and my friends) but Linksys with N is work great as I see mostly of you use Linksys with N. I learned something today.
 
The Highlander said:
I believe that Linksys with CISCO with G should not work (happen to me and my friends) but Linksys with N is work great as I see mostly of you use Linksys with N. I learned something today.
Click to expand...

Yeah I know what you talking about or either Linksys or Sorenson had updated to fix the issue you guys had those days.
 
Back
Top