[mythtv-users] Slightly off topic: Network connection question

[tortise]

On 2/01/2013 8:44 a.m., Mike Perkins wrote:
> Huh? This is the *exact* network topology I am using and I don't need
> three routers. Talk of NAT problems is irrelevant since all the internal
> networks are the same side of the firewall.
>
> My system has a Jetway mini-itx board with an add-on multi-NIC card, but
> the same result could be had by using any motherboard and adding NICs. I
> run pfSense as my firewall software. The Internet side is connected to a
> cable modem which gets a single DHCP-assigned IP address.
>
> On the "inside", as it were, I have three 192.168.x.x subnets defined
> although I don't use one of them at present. One is the "trusted"
> network with all the servers and linux workstations on it. The second is
> "untrusted" and has the windows boxes and the Wireless Access Point. The
> AP defines a fourth subnet which is used by all wireless users, filtered
> by MAC.
>
> There are specific static routes defined such that wireless users and
> the windows boxes can access my printers and the myth server for
> mythweb, etc. Other than that there is little need for configuration.
>

Yet another way is to use a vlan capable router such as pfsense, (x-WRT 
softwares also?) two NIC's (1 to Internet and 2nd to the smart switch) 
and connect to a VLAN capable parent switch such as a relatively 
economic Linksys SLM2008 8Port Switch for up to 8 sub VLANs. Hang a dumb 
switch off each VLAN port defined to/in the Linksys switch.  I recall 
there may be a cheaper 5 port version.  Disclaimer: I've not yet done 
this however see no reason for it not to work well.

I prefer pfsense, one less obvious reason is that with ever faster 
Internet connections many existing routers will not cope with the 
traffic throughput and will become bottlenecks. With pfsense the 
bottleneck is defined by the CPU sizes.

I also agree a switch between the Router and modem is pointless as there 
is nothing to switch!