Ethernet DSL modem?

I'm looking to ditch NTL cable after putting up with their crap
servers and proxies for far too long.

Since I have a VoIP router with NAT used with my current cable modem I
only need a non-NAT (bridging) DSL modem with Ethernet connectivity.

What comes recommended (or best avoided, come to that)? ADSL2+
support is desirable, but not essential. Are the old D-Link (300G and
300T) boxes OK?

> I'm looking to ditch NTL cable after putting up with their crap
> servers and proxies for far too long.
>
> Since I have a VoIP router with NAT used with my current cable modem I
> only need a non-NAT (bridging) DSL modem with Ethernet connectivity.
>
> What comes recommended (or best avoided, come to that)? ADSL2+
> support is desirable, but not essential. Are the old D-Link (300G and
> 300T) boxes OK?

Buy yourself a Draytek 2600 for £50-60 on Ebay. Rock solid and last for
ever. Mine has run non stop for years.

Peter Crosland

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Mark says...
> I'm looking to ditch NTL cable after putting up with their crap
> servers and proxies for far too long.
>
> Since I have a VoIP router with NAT used with my current cable modem I
> only need a non-NAT (bridging) DSL modem with Ethernet connectivity.
>
> What comes recommended (or best avoided, come to that)? ADSL2+
> support is desirable, but not essential. Are the old D-Link (300G and
> 300T) boxes OK?
>
A Linksys ADSL2 modem will only cost you about £25.

http://www.adslguide.org.uk/hardware...nksysADSL2.asp

Peter Crosland wrote:
>> I'm looking to ditch NTL cable after putting up with their crap
>> servers and proxies for far too long.
>>
>> Since I have a VoIP router with NAT used with my current cable
>> modem
>> I only need a non-NAT (bridging) DSL modem with Ethernet
>> connectivity. What comes recommended (or best avoided, come to
>> that)? ADSL2+
>> support is desirable, but not essential. Are the old D-Link (300G
>> and 300T) boxes OK?
>
> Buy yourself a Draytek 2600 for £50-60 on Ebay. Rock solid and last
> for ever. Mine has run non stop for years.

Yes but the OP asked about routers which have the facility to turn NAT
off, the 2600 doesn't (or if it does please enlighten me as I would
honestly like to know)

>>> I'm looking to ditch NTL cable after putting up with their crap
>>> servers and proxies for far too long.
>>>
>>> Since I have a VoIP router with NAT used with my current cable
>>> modem
>>> I only need a non-NAT (bridging) DSL modem with Ethernet
>>> connectivity. What comes recommended (or best avoided, come to
>>> that)? ADSL2+
>>> support is desirable, but not essential. Are the old D-Link (300G
>>> and 300T) boxes OK?
>>
>> Buy yourself a Draytek 2600 for £50-60 on Ebay. Rock solid and last
>> for ever. Mine has run non stop for years.
>
> Yes but the OP asked about routers which have the facility to turn NAT
> off, the 2600 doesn't (or if it does please enlighten me as I would
> honestly like to know)

I have misread what he wants. However, AFAIK, you just don't set any
translations up. I now have a 2800 which may be different of course!

Peter Crosland

On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:28:48 +0100, Mark <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>What comes recommended (or best avoided, come to that)?

what you are trying to do is IMHO best avoided. You need to find a
modem with the appropriate kludge to work with the router you have.
ADSLnation's X-modem makes great claims in this area.

Ethernet modems to my mind don't exist. They're one port modem/routers
using some kludge to pass the external IP to the thing behind them.

Phil
--
http://www.notspot.info/ - if you can't get the Broadband you want.

On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 23:35:05 +0100, in uk.telecom.broadband , Phil
Thompson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Ethernet modems to my mind don't exist. They're one port modem/routers

Indeed.

>using some kludge to pass the external IP to the thing behind them.

Huh? Thats all USB modems are too, except they move the responsibility
for the kludge from the dedicated firm/hardware in the modem, to
driver software in your PC. Personally I prefer dedicated.
--
Mark McIntyre

"Mark McIntyre" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 23:35:05 +0100, in uk.telecom.broadband , Phil
> Thompson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Ethernet modems to my mind don't exist. They're one port modem/routers
>
> Indeed.
>
> >using some kludge to pass the external IP to the thing behind them.
>
> Huh? Thats all USB modems are too, except they move the responsibility
> for the kludge from the dedicated firm/hardware in the modem, to
> driver software in your PC. Personally I prefer dedicated.

USB was never in the frame. The original question was for a Ethernet Modem
to go into an existing router. As many have said on here the OP would be
much better served replacing the exiting router with one with a built in
ADSL modem.

As for routers that will pass the IP address through I have a Speed Touch
510 and that can be configured in that mode...


> --
> Mark McIntyre

On Sat, 24 Jun 2006 12:28:10 +0100, Mark McIntyre
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Huh? Thats all USB modems are too, except they move the responsibility
>for the kludge from the dedicated firm/hardware in the modem, to
>driver software in your PC.

nah, a USB modem is an interface device for the PC with most of the
work done in the PC. The ATM stream terminates in the PC which
naturally gets the IP address, there is no IP address for the modem.

You can't plug a USB modem into a power supply and have it sync to the
exchange, it doesn't have the capability to do anything without a PC.

Phil
--
http://www.notspot.info/ - if you can't get the Broadband you want.

On Sun, 25 Jun 2006 11:44:15 +0100, "David Wade" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>"Mark McIntyre" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 23:35:05 +0100, in uk.telecom.broadband , Phil
>> Thompson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>> >Ethernet modems to my mind don't exist. They're one port modem/routers
>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>> >using some kludge to pass the external IP to the thing behind them.
>>
>> Huh? Thats all USB modems are too, except they move the responsibility
>> for the kludge from the dedicated firm/hardware in the modem, to
>> driver software in your PC. Personally I prefer dedicated.
>
>USB was never in the frame. The original question was for a Ethernet Modem
>to go into an existing router. As many have said on here the OP would be
>much better served replacing the exiting router with one with a built in
>ADSL modem.

Thanks to all for the replies so far.

Please can someone explain what is so inelegant (or whatever) about
using a modem in bridging mode into my existing Sipura VoIP router? Is
the performance compromised - and if so, in what way? Is there proof?

Or conversely why it would be much better not to do so?

TIA
--
Mark