[ale] Re: home subnets

[David S. Jackson]

On Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 02:17:31PM -0500 JD Runyan <Jason.Runyan at NITCKC.USDA.Gov> wrote:
> Ten boxes makes life much easier.  Now you can play.  Build a SMB server
> that exists on both networks physically, and share the files there.  Then the
> machines are not ever in contact with each other.  Most of the
> NetBios/MS protocol exploits have no effect on Linux/SMB so there won't
> be a relay.  You could use your router box to do this, but I would try
> and use a seperate box for that.  She will see the server just like a
> windows server, so it should be easy.


This sounds kinda fun.  Here's what I've got so far (planned, not
implemented):

INET => DSL/Nat/Firewall ====>hub 
                              |
			      |
			      |
	|--------------------> 192.168.0.X network
	|		      |
        |                     |--mailserver 192.168.0.??
	|		      |
	|		      eth0 = 192.168.0.1
	|		      internal router
	|		      eth1 = 192.168.50.1
eth0 = 192.168.0.??           |
  SMB/NFS server (486 16MB)   |
  (no routing or bridging)    |
eth1 = 192.168.50.?? --------hub
		              |
		              ===>192.168.50.??
			          Wife's box
			          (Zone alarm implemented)
			     

This is my first attempt at a home subnet, and I dont' mind the
extra work.  I'll consider it a feather in my cap if I can get
this to work properly.  :-)

Does this sound reasonable so far?

--
David S. Jackson                        dsj at dsj.net
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
God is a comic playing to an audience that's afraid
to laugh.

---
This message has been sent through the ALE general discussion list.
See http://www.ale.org/mailing-lists.shtml for more info. Problems should be 
sent to listmaster at ale dot org.