Looking for GOOD combination cable modem / wireless router

I am looking for a single device that is both a wireless router with
good security (WPA, stateful packet inspection, etc.) and a DOCSIS
cable modem for use with Comcast in the San Francisco bay area.

I did find the Linksys CGA200, but the user reviews on Amazon.com
indicate terrible problems.

Any suggestions?
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstein+(E-Mail Removed) {{ }}
^^

(E-Mail Removed) (David Arnstein) hath wroth:

>I am looking for a single device that is both a wireless router with
>good security (WPA, stateful packet inspection, etc.) and a DOCSIS
>cable modem for use with Comcast in the San Francisco bay area.
>
>I did find the Linksys CGA200, but the user reviews on Amazon.com
>indicate terrible problems.
>
>Any suggestions?

Motorola SBG900
<http://broadband.motorola.com/consumers/products/sbg900/>
There's also the Motorola SBG1000 but I think it's no longer being
sold.

Certified Comcast Cable Modems:
<http://media2.comcast.net/anon.comcastonline2/support/help/misc/cmclist.html>
Most of the wireless sections are not supported by Comcast. Just
search the above URL for the word "wireless".

Are you interested in hearing the reasons why such an all-in-one
conglomeration of modem, router, and wireless access point, in one
package, is a bad idea?

--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Jeff Liebermann <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Motorola SBG900
><http://broadband.motorola.com/consumers/products/sbg900/>
>There's also the Motorola SBG1000 but I think it's no longer being
>sold.

It doesn't seem to have WPA. I downloaded the user guide and searched.

>Certified Comcast Cable Modems:
><http://media2.comcast.net/anon.comcastonline2/support/help/misc/cmclist.html>
>Most of the wireless sections are not supported by Comcast. Just
>search the above URL for the word "wireless".

Wrong and wrong. The word "wireless" does not appear next to every wireless
product on this web page. For example, the Motorola SBG900.

>Are you interested in hearing the reasons why such an all-in-one
>conglomeration of modem, router, and wireless access point, in one
>package, is a bad idea?

Yes Jeff. And thank you for your initial response.
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstein+(E-Mail Removed) {{ }}
^^

(E-Mail Removed) (David Arnstein) hath wroth:

>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>Jeff Liebermann <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>Motorola SBG900
>><http://broadband.motorola.com/consumers/products/sbg900/>
>>There's also the Motorola SBG1000 but I think it's no longer being
>>sold.
>
>It doesn't seem to have WPA. I downloaded the user guide and searched.

It was added in some past firmware update and apparently never made it
into the manual or data sheet:
<http://whirlpool.net.au/index.cfm?a=h_view&model_id=181>
<http://www.speedguide.net/broadband-view.php?hw=19>
Just search Google for "SBG900 WPA" and you should get plenty of hits.

Argh, the Motomorons buried it. See:
<http://broadband.motorola.com/consumers/products/SBG900/downloads/SBG900_Data_Sheet.pdf>
Just above the line with WEP, it spells out "Wireless Protected
Access".

For more docs and downloads, see;
<http://broadband.motorola.com/consumers/support/default.asp?supportSection=CableModems>

>>Certified Comcast Cable Modems:
>><http://media2.comcast.net/anon.comcastonline2/support/help/misc/cmclist.html>
>>Most of the wireless sections are not supported by Comcast. Just
>>search the above URL for the word "wireless".

>Wrong and wrong. The word "wireless" does not appear next to every wireless
>product on this web page. For example, the Motorola SBG900.

True. It only appears next to the boxes that Comcast does NOT support
the wireless section. If that's acceptable, you have a very large
list to search. Sorry, but it was the best list I could find. The
rest, you have to do some digging.

>>Are you interested in hearing the reasons why such an all-in-one
>>conglomeration of modem, router, and wireless access point, in one
>>package, is a bad idea?
>
>Yes Jeff. And thank you for your initial response.

Conglomerated units tend to be a compromise. The router sections are
insipid compared to what can be found in a Sonicwall, Cisco, or even
high end commodity router. For example, I've noticed that most have
either limited or no QoS for VoIP, no WDS support, and limited
diagnostics. Upgrades to the modem sections are often problematic.
For example, if we ever get DOCSIS 3.0 in the area, most of the
existing modems don't have sufficient horsepower to handle channel
bonding and such. As new wireless acronyms arrive (MIMO, roaming,
WMM, etc), upgrading the wireless section may also be problematic.
This is usually done by replacing just the wireless access point to
add acronym support, but impossible with a conglomerated unit.

Location is my main objection. The modem and router want to live
somewhere near the floor, where all the cables and wires come
together. However, the wireless works best when the antenna is
elevated to above the furniture clutter, such as on a bookshelf.
Putting the conglomerated unit on a shelf or desktop will work, but
you have to drag the wires along. My favorite form of security is to
just turn off the wireless section. That's easily done with an access
point, but not so easy with a conglomerated unit. Of course, if you
decide to switch to DSL, the entire unit is useless as you can't use
the router or wireless with an external DSL modem without access to
the inter-section (ethernet) ports.

This lack of inter-section access also causes me problems with
monitoring. I like to monitor traffic on the WAN side of the router,
to see what users are doing and what attacks are being dropped. That
can't be done with a conglomerated unit as there is no easy way to tap
the traffic. (JTAG port will NOT work for monitoring).

In case of a failure, it's much easier to troubleshoot (by
replacement) with 3 seperate sections.

I will admit that there are benifits. It's easier to monitor the
modem diagnostics in a conglomeration as the internal web browser has
access to everything. One device setup instead of three setups are
obviously simpler. Cost of usually less for a conglomerated unit and
often subsidized by the cable company. Of course, there's only one
wall wart to add to the rats nest behind the TV and computah.

--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Jeff Liebermann <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Just above the line with WEP, it spells out "Wireless Protected
>Access".
>
>For more docs and downloads, see;
> ...

Thank you Jeff for this valuable info. I would never have found this
myself.

>Conglomerated units tend to be a compromise. The router sections are
>insipid compared to what can be found in a Sonicwall, Cisco, or even
>high end commodity router.
> ...

Excellent summary. I *might* go with the Motorola box if it can do
everything I need: NAT, DHCP, SPI, WPA2, NTP, syslog, save/restore
config, ...

But your summary gives me pause. And, the Motorola box is just a bit
too pricy for me to buy it and just see if it works.

Thanks for your help Jeff.
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstein+(E-Mail Removed) {{ }}
^^

On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 19:50:16 +0000 (UTC), (E-Mail Removed) (David
Arnstein) wrote:

>Excellent summary. I *might* go with the Motorola box if it can do
>everything I need: NAT, DHCP, SPI, WPA2, NTP, syslog, save/restore
>config, ...

I'm doing this from memory, so treat the following with suspicion. I
don't think the Rotomola SBG900 has user configurable NTP as it gets
its time from the cable network. Syslog and SNMP are there, but not
user accessible. The cable company uses them for management and
monitoring. There are internal web accessible logs for firewall and
such, but no way to send them to a designated syslog server. Nifty
MAC layer wireless statistics page shows retransmissions and errors.
No save/restore of config. WPA only, no WPA2. Like I said, the
router sections are rather insipid.

All the above is guesswork from memory and might be wrong. The online
docs are no help because they're apparently from an early firmware
version.

>But your summary gives me pause. And, the Motorola box is just a bit
>too pricy for me to buy it and just see if it works.

It has remote access so I could possibly arrange for a tour.

What's your total price for the package (modem, router, and wireless)?
While 3 separate boxes are better, they're probably not cheaper. My
guess is that you can get a DOCSIS 2.0 modem down to about $60 after
rebates. The router can be grudgingly combined with wireless to keep
it cheap. I suggest a Buffalo WHR-HP-G54 with DD-WRT firmware (so you
have your listed features) for about $60. $20 less if you don't want
the high power version. See emulator at:
<http://www.informatione.gmxhome.de/DDWRT/Standard/V23final/index.html>
This is an emulation of the original v23. A few things have changed
in the current SP2 version.


--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 (E-Mail Removed)
# http://802.11junk.com (E-Mail Removed)
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Jeff Liebermann <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 19:50:16 +0000 (UTC), (E-Mail Removed) (David
>Arnstein) wrote:
>What's your total price for the package (modem, router, and wireless)?
>While 3 separate boxes are better, they're probably not cheaper. My
>guess is that you can get a DOCSIS 2.0 modem down to about $60 after
>rebates. The router can be grudgingly combined with wireless to keep
>it cheap. I suggest a Buffalo WHR-HP-G54 with DD-WRT firmware (so you
>have your listed features) for about $60. $20 less if you don't want
>the high power version. See emulator at:
><http://www.informatione.gmxhome.de/DDWRT/Standard/V23final/index.html>
>This is an emulation of the original v23. A few things have changed
>in the current SP2 version.

Now I am convinced that a nice, neat, single box is not feasible. I
already have a nice Motorola cable modem, so I will look for a
combination wireless access point / router / firewall. I am not very
cost sensitive actually. I am willing to pay a premium for a good
unit. Do you still suggest the WHR-HP-G54?

I will be swapping out a Cisco 800 series SOHO router (not wireless).
This router/firewall can do anything I can imagine, and I can save my
highly crafted config on my PC where it is safe. So, I am spoiled.
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstein+(E-Mail Removed) {{ }}
^^

On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 11:09:28 +0000 (UTC), (E-Mail Removed) (David
Arnstein) wrote in <ekjpp8$6jm$(E-Mail Removed)>:

>Now I am convinced that a nice, neat, single box is not feasible. I
>already have a nice Motorola cable modem, so I will look for a
>combination wireless access point / router / firewall. I am not very
>cost sensitive actually. I am willing to pay a premium for a good
>unit. Do you still suggest the WHR-HP-G54?

Yes.

>I will be swapping out a Cisco 800 series SOHO router (not wireless).
>This router/firewall can do anything I can imagine, and I can save my
>highly crafted config on my PC where it is safe. So, I am spoiled.

Why not keep the Cisco, and just use the WHR-HP-G54 as a wireless access
point?

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

John Navas <(E-Mail Removed)> hath wroth:

>>I will be swapping out a Cisco 800 series SOHO router (not wireless).
>>This router/firewall can do anything I can imagine, and I can save my
>>highly crafted config on my PC where it is safe. So, I am spoiled.

>Why not keep the Cisco, and just use the WHR-HP-G54 as a wireless access
>point?

Agreed. The Cisco 800 will do the router part of the puzzle for you.
All you need is a wireless access point. The WHR-HP-G54 will work
fine if you simply disable the DHCP server and ignore the router
section (don't connect anything to the WAN port). How to setup a
wireless router as an access point:
<http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_How_To#Use_a_wireless_router_as_a_wireless_acce ss_point>
The wireless section will do everything you've previously listed. The
main feature is a decent radio section and WPA2. However, with DD-WRT
firmware, I suspect the WHR-HP-G54 will suffice in place of the Cisco
800. It won't have ACL's and such, but most of the other acronyms are
there.

One catch on saving the configs from the WHR-HP-G54 and DD-WRT. I've
had the saved configs blow up between firmware upgrades. When I
upgraded from V23 sp1 to sp2, the old config didn't work (httpd
wouldn't start). I had to reload everything from scratch.

--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 08:55:52 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
<(E-Mail Removed)>:

>One catch on saving the configs from the WHR-HP-G54 and DD-WRT. I've
>had the saved configs blow up between firmware upgrades. When I
>upgraded from V23 sp1 to sp2, the old config didn't work (httpd
>wouldn't start). I had to reload everything from scratch.

Perhaps the open source community doesn't really understand XML.

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>