I have a private LAN, hooked to a Netgear router and a cable modem... and now I need to add a limited "public" access, but I want to very tightly firewall the two, to keep my private network secure.
Can I run another router, in "parallel" perhaps, and give it another IP range, so that it is in a completley different net?
How would I go about setting that up, if it's possible?
Any tips would be appreciated...
2006-08-01
09:32:45
·
7 answers
·
asked by
IanP
6
in
Computers & Internet
➔ Computer Networking
You might have better luck hooking the routers up in series that in parallel.
Have the first router provide access to the machines that you want visible to the internet, then hook the second router to the first router and then hang all of your private equipment off of that.
Good luck
2006-08-01 13:37:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
It's hard to say without more details.
One router should be good enough although I don't know if your particular router is. I'd have to know what router model it is.
The Linksys RV042 may have the features you want. It's a powerful Linux based router that supports two WAN (Internet) interfaces, a DMZ (low security) port, VPN, TCP/IP port based access lists, NAT, domain name blocking and catching, DHCP, Logging, and more.
It's access list can grant or deny access by IP, IP Range, Protocol port number, or interface.
Like I said, it depends on what your router is capable of. You should be able to do what you want with a single router for small to medium sized networks.
----
VLANs are cool, but perhaps provide more than what you need. VLANs greatest strengths are physical security and breaking up broadcast domains. For VLANs to work you need a switch with management functions and a VLAN capable router (Sometimes included as a function of the switch itself). It will cost you more.
At any rate the security of a VLAN still comes down to a router at some point if the VLANs are to share any of the same resources.
2006-08-01 10:11:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
At first look from your question it would seem like you actually need 3 routers:1 to connect to the cable mode and 2 for the different wireless networks you wanna run.
There are firewalls out there that are capable of creating virtual networks. They can connect to one single internet connection, such as your cable modem, and then "virtualize" separate internal networks to allow different levels of security. I'm adding one option to the source list (first option I'm including is just to show you there is equipment out there that can do what you are talking about right out of the box: not too affordable though)
However, depending on what components you already own, you might be able to get what you want with less equipment. Could you please tell us what equipment you already have (model #'s)?
Also, how much would you be willing to spend to get it done correctly?
2006-08-01 09:34:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by marmozsdx 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
you'll have all sorts of trouble.
In the router, assign privelage settings in the firewall section by IP
then give the computers you want limited access to those ip addresses. bypass the DHCP and just run the ips static.
It's what I do here @ work for a few "choice" employees.
check with your netgear manuals for instructions.
2006-08-01 09:37:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by zeropointe01 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
You need to set up a switch which will allow you to program it with VLAN's. You can then designate different ports of the switch to be different VLAN's. Thus creating the 2 networks you are looking for.
Your Netgear router will not allow you to do this.
2006-08-01 09:39:09
·
answer #5
·
answered by Taztug 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I desire we ought to respond to an mind-blowing form of issues, yet while 2 diverse departments make 2 diverse judgements on the fly, then you definitely can get 2 diverse consequences with out the two being a lie. those departments do no longer continuously agree, and could be somewhat jealous of their autonomy. however the video became a tale the comprehensive international became attentive to, and interior the long term it makes no distinction in any respect to the consequence. Nor does the call of the team in charge, nor does 'reason' in the back of the attack. The attack got here about and four adult males died and no call, no task of accountability, no reason could have replaced that.
2016-10-01 08:50:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by Erika 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
?
2006-08-01 09:36:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by black_ca_scorpio 4
·
0⤊
0⤋