From: "Jon Harrison" <ecs-t6x@2rosenthals.com>
Received-SPF: none (secmgr-ny.randr: 216.162.174.5 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of seadog.reno.nv.us) client-ip=216.162.174.5; envelope-from=jharrison@seadog.reno.nv.us; helo=pop5.greatbasin.net;
Message-ID: <100-eb770e48-37986.041@seadog.reno.nv.us>
To: "eCS ThinkPad T60/61 Mailing List" <ecs-t6x@2rosenthals.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:42:35 -0700 (PDT)
Priority: Normal
User-Agent: PMMail/3.00 (os/2; U; Warp 4.5; en-US; i386; ver 3.00.00.0935)
In-Reply-To: <185673.15.25.13.22.04.2008@seadog.reno.nv.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [eCS T60/T61] Wireless vs. Cable settings

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 18:22:09 -0400, Lewis G Rosenthal wrote:

>So the WRT54G is the only switch on your network, and you have an OS/2 
>box serving as a bastion server connected to the DSL. This is 
>interesting, because with a WRT54G, I would normally put that on the 
>outside, and use it as a NAT firewall/router instead of a real computer.

I understand.  However, I set up the firewall computer w/ IJFW
quite a few years prior to obtaining the linksys.  I considered
that I could change it but why bother?  I might get a better
troughput with the linksys than w/ the PIII Compaq (w/ 2 nic's)
that servers as my NAT firewall/router.

>So, I assume that the OS/2 box on the outside has two NICs in it and is 
>routing traffic to the net for you. Are you running DNS on this, or is 
>the 1.1.1.1 address something else?

No, I'm not running dns, ddns on the linksys.  I vaguely recall
that perhaps 1.1.1.1 means to pass through the dns requests to the
next stop upstream.  I'm not really sure of this, only that it
works.

>Interesting. The next time you encounter the trouble, try pinging some 
>IP addresses on the net. A good one to test is one of GTE's old DNS boxes:

Been there, done that.  Ping'd yahoo's IP and got no response. 
Also tried nslookup on my isp, & google.  That is when I decided I
had either a gateway or dns problem.  And when the gateway was
correctly set I figured it was dns.  What is really odd is that the
ping only works on the inside.  And when I was (and still am)
unable to boot I moved over to xp and it works fine, proving that
there is not a hardware issue.

>I used to routinely keep four or five in my resolv2. excess entries are 
>simply ignored. The important lines are the top two (domain and first DNS).

That is what I figured, I just tossed it out for comment in case it
was a no-no.

I just pulled down the v3.07 stuff.  I don't know why I couldn't
see those files this morning.  Also I was unaware that apm had to
be matched w/ acpi so I need to check and see what version I have
for apm.  

Thanks,
Jon