Re: [Hampshire] [OT] USB modem and network

<-- Warning: charset 'X-UNKNOWN' is not supported -->


On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 hantslug@??? wrote:

> Yes - it is a temporary solution and I have been given a budget of ?20 to
> include P&P.

Ok, well that is a pretty tight budget but as Alan demonstrated is do-able
in normal circumstances. However when you throw AOL into the mix getting
things working with one of those cheap devices is likely to be very
difficult if not impossible, especially from 120 miles away.

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006, Alan Pope wrote:

> > He is changing to Sky broadband in two or three months' time and Sky supplies
> > a Netgear DG834xx for free.
> >
>
> Hahah, I'd stay with AOL!

Any reason for this comment other than your dislike of all things Murdoch?

I know a number of people who are very happy with their Sky broadband, it
is true none of them are really "power users" they have no interest in
fiddling with the connection or setting up servers at home, but for email
and web browsing (which is probably all Lisi's friends want) it seems to
work and allow multiple machines to access the connection ok.

A coworker is talking about moving to Sky Broadband next year, he runs
Fedora at home and will want servers hanging off the end of the line so it
will be interesting to see how he gets on.

> He does realise that when he gets Sky broadband he is going to need a
> network card in both machines doesn't he? In which case if they already
> have them he *could* string an ethernet cable between them and share the
> DSL connection from one to the other right now. If he *doesn't* have
> ethernet cards on the PCs (onboard or otherwise) then he will come an
> equal cropper when Sky broadband is installed.

Much as it pains me to agree with Alan, he has a very valid point there.

Internet Connection Sharing on Windows is pretty easy to set up, assuming
you already have a network card in each machine and if they don't they
will need then soon anyway. So that sounds like a the best temporary
solution to me even if it does mean the computer acting as a router will
have to be running for the secondary machine to have net access.


Andy