The NAT (Network Address Translation) firewall function is actually built-in
to the router, ie. both the Linksys or the Buffalo. I was simply trying to
illustrate that a firewall, of some form, existed at that point. I guess the
drawing would be clearer if I got rid of that or put a box around both the
Linksys BEFSR41 and the firewall image.
Both the Buffalo WBR-G54 and the Linksys BEFSR41 provide the same
functionality except for the fact the Buffalo also has a wireless component.
In your situation you could easily just use a combo wireless access
point/router like the Buffalo illustrates in the first link. That is my
normal network.
The second network simply illustrates, or tries to, what a network would
like if I used a purely wired broadband router for the internet front end
and added a wireless access point (or in this case a combo wireless access
point/router configured to act only as an access point) to the network.
--
Al Jarvi (MS-MVP Windows Networking)
Please post *ALL* questions and replies to the news group for the mutual
benefit of all of us...
The MS-MVP Program -
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights...
"phasti" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:7658F184-5F41-4B35-A7C6-(E-Mail Removed)...
> What exactly is the function of the NAT (what's that mean?) router, i.e.,
> why
> a separate router for the firewall function? Isn't that normally part of
> the
> function of routers? Doesn't the Buffalo router provide that function or
> worst case, couldn't you use a software firewall and get rid of the NAT
> router firewall function altogether?
>
> Beyond that concern and question, the diagrams help a lot. So, it looks
> like I can have a mxid environment but there is no wireless port off a
> standard router. I'd have to use one port with an ethernet connection to
> a
> separate wireless router and access point. Right? What does a wireless
> router/access point combination get me that a router alone wouldn't?
> Since I
> only want to go to a laptop, couldn't I just use a wireless router?
>
> Thanks for helping out!
>
> "Sooner Al [MVP]" wrote:
>
>> It might look like my current home mixed LAN using a Buffalo WBR-G54
>> 4-Port
>> Broadband Router/802.11b/g Wireless Access Point..
>>
>> http://theillustratednetwork.mvps.org/LAN/LAN.jpg
>>
>> ...or if you only wanted to purchase a wireless access point like this
>> network...In this case the Buffalo is configured and used as a wireless
>> access point only...
>>
>> http://theillustratednetwork.mvps.or...xampleLAN.html
>>
>> --
>>
>> Al Jarvi (MS-MVP Windows Networking)
>>
>> Please post *ALL* questions and replies to the news group for the mutual
>> benefit of all of us...
>> The MS-MVP Program - http://mvp.support.microsoft.com
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights...
>>
>> "phasti" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:F6D8B857-073C-41C5-9EB0-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> > Can you mix wired and unwired PCs in a simply home LAN where 2 wired
>> > PCs
>> > and
>> > 1 unwired laptop are plugged into a wired 4 port d-link router which is
>> > connected to a cable modem and thus to the Internet? How would the
>> > configuration look? I'm assuming the answer will be that I need a
>> > wireless
>> > router to accomodate the wireless laptop and I'm hoping that there are
>> > wireless routers which can accomodate both wired and wireless PCs
>> > because
>> > I
>> > don't want to have to get wireless adapters for the 2 PCs. Am I right?
>> >
>> > All PCs are running XP sp2.
>>
>>
>>