Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ForgottenSeer 58943" data-source="post: 706137">What is a &#039;portal router&#039;? I&#039;ve never heard that term.&nbsp; Also, why would you need all of these routers? They are serving no purpose at all. The purpose of a small switch isn&#039;t the number of devices on a lan in some cases, in your case it&#039;s allowing you to place the eBlocker into the mix and to have eBlocker as your DHCP server. The second purpose of a switch in your case is to get your AP (or router in AP mode BEHIND the Cujo because it&#039;s going into your switch which then puts all of your wireless devices behind the Cujo and thus - within the proxy filtration scope of the Cujo.First, does your ONT handle DHCP?&nbsp; I assume the ONT is serving as an SPF to convert fiber to ethernet and doesn&#039;t do anything else, right? The primary concerns with more than one router is: 1) Double or Triple NAT. 2) More than one DHCP. Then you need to consider arp and packet storm issues.I don&#039;t know how your ONT functions, but logically, it should flow like this;ONT -&gt;Router (DHCP off)-&gt;Cujo (bridged) -&gt;Switch-&gt;eBlocker(DHCP)There should be no reason to add yet another router into the mix as it would serve no purpose whatsoever. Any AP or a router in AP mode would be behind the switch and thus, behind the Cujo so it would be behind the Cujo proxy. eBlocker seems to work by acting as a DHCP server w/DNS filtration so it doesn&#039;t matter where it&#039;s location is in the network as it will direct reservation requests to itself.I think you are over complicating things to be honest.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ForgottenSeer 58943, post: 706137"] What is a 'portal router'? I've never heard that term. Also, why would you need all of these routers? They are serving no purpose at all. The purpose of a small switch isn't the number of devices on a lan in some cases, in your case it's allowing you to place the eBlocker into the mix and to have eBlocker as your DHCP server. The second purpose of a switch in your case is to get your AP (or router in AP mode BEHIND the Cujo because it's going into your switch which then puts all of your wireless devices behind the Cujo and thus - within the proxy filtration scope of the Cujo. First, does your ONT handle DHCP? I assume the ONT is serving as an SPF to convert fiber to ethernet and doesn't do anything else, right? The primary concerns with more than one router is: 1) Double or Triple NAT. 2) More than one DHCP. Then you need to consider arp and packet storm issues. I don't know how your ONT functions, but logically, it should flow like this; ONT ->Router (DHCP off)->Cujo (bridged) ->Switch->eBlocker(DHCP) There should be no reason to add yet another router into the mix as it would serve no purpose whatsoever. Any AP or a router in AP mode would be behind the switch and thus, behind the Cujo so it would be behind the Cujo proxy. eBlocker seems to work by acting as a DHCP server w/DNS filtration so it doesn't matter where it's location is in the network as it will direct reservation requests to itself. I think you are over complicating things to be honest. [/QUOTE]

Verification