DSL not recognizing the modem...what else is new?
in [Setup]
|
Prev: Did Debian's text console font change recently? How to get theold one back? -- It was Nouveau in Kernel 2.6.32-5!
Next: Fedora 13: Need help setting up dual monitors.
From: Peter on 7 Jun 2010 16:25 In article <RcGdnYj5S-_NCZHRnZ2dnUVZ8tGdnZ2d(a)brightview.co.uk>, nigel.feltham(a)btinternet.com says... > Peter wrote: > > > In article <6f185f76-27a3-4db0-8c21- > > 106dd69b7130(a)j8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, raylopez88(a)gmail.com says... > >> > >> Stupid question #2: if I go with the D-Link, I just power it up, plug > >> the speedtouch DSL modem into the "WAN" port as input, then ethernet > >> cables from two of the four other ports to my two PCs' ethernet card > >> ports, right? Then on bootup the PCs should both recognize the DSL > >> modem, right? And both can independently surf the internet via the > >> same DLS modem right? (with a performance penalty I assume for sharing > >> the same bandwidth of course). > >> > > > > No, the router would replace the modem and connect directly to the phone > > line. > > Not in this case as from the description it sounds like he has a cable modem > (ADSL modems have phone connection labelled 'Line', cable modems have 'WAN' > ports) which does need a separate ADSL modem/router connected to the WAN > port to work this way (not forgetting to configure the router for > user/password and other connection settings). > Aah, well he did say it was a DSL modem. Guess he was wrong. -- Pete Ives Remove All_stRESS before sending me an email
From: Peter on 7 Jun 2010 16:28 In article <huibv9$hu2$2(a)news.eternal-september.org>, hadronquark(a)gmail.com says... > Peter <pete.ivesAll_stRESS(a)blueyonder.co.uk> writes: > > > In article <6f185f76-27a3-4db0-8c21- > > 106dd69b7130(a)j8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, raylopez88(a)gmail.com says... > >> > >> Stupid question #2: if I go with the D-Link, I just power it up, plug > >> the speedtouch DSL modem into the "WAN" port as input, then ethernet > >> cables from two of the four other ports to my two PCs' ethernet card > >> ports, right? Then on bootup the PCs should both recognize the DSL > >> modem, right? And both can independently surf the internet via the > >> same DLS modem right? (with a performance penalty I assume for sharing > >> the same bandwidth of course). > >> > > > > No, the router would replace the modem and connect directly to the phone > > line. > > Router's do not replace modems. > > Unless it's a dsl modem/router combo product. > > Isn't that what he has? A DSL modem. Which in my book is replaced by an ADSL modem/router. Which I thought the D-Link was. And if it isn't, then it's no good to him. -- Pete Ives Remove All_stRESS before sending me an email
From: David Brown on 7 Jun 2010 16:57 RayLopez99 wrote: > On Jun 7, 8:58 pm, David Brown > <david.br...(a)hesbynett.removethisbit.no> wrote: > >>> Whatever. Most people use Windows. >> What's that got to do with anything? It's not related to the operating >> system. It's about having appropriate hardware, and following the basic >> instructions for it. >> >> In reality, setting up a simple network, like you are trying to do, is >> easier with Linux than with Windows. Setting up a complex network is >> /much/ easier with Linux than with Windows, but that's another topic. >> > > We'll see in about two hours. First I got to do some coding, after > making dinner. Around midnight my time, Greece is currently on EEST - > UTC +0300, I'll find out how easy Linux is for networks...see if it > recognizes my card. > >> >>>> Unless your Linux machine hardware is broken, or you have managed to do >>>> something incomprehensible with the setup of the machine, then you just >>>> connect your Linux box Ethernet card to the switch and it will work. >>> OK, but that runs counter to the Ethernet card users manual, which >>> specifically said do NOT install the hardware before installing the >>> drivers found on the CD-ROM. They were very specific. >> You've got an Ethernet card and a computer from the age of the >> dinosaurs. The manual is describing drivers from an OS that went out of >> date ten years ago. > > OK. > >> Remember, this is /Linux/ you are working with. The drivers are in the >> system already. It's not a Windows system that can't see a network card >> until you have downloaded a 100 MB driver file (I kid you not about the >> size - that was from a recent Windows install on a Lenevo PC). > > That's bloatware for sure, since they write drivers mostly in C, which > is a compact language. > Who is "they" that write drivers mostly in C? In Linux, drivers are almost invariably written in C. But on Windows, there is no such rule - people write drivers in a variety of languages. Also, hardware suppliers seem to have this obsession with providing endless piles of junk along with the drivers themselves, and it is this that takes up space. The installer for this particular driver and junk-utilities-package wouldn't even run until dotnet had been installed. >> Helping you out is good for the karma, I suppose. > > I suppose. Or you might, if Linux works, convert a Windows user to > Linux! :-) (Not me, since I need Windows because I code in C#, but > the non-Power user who will be getting this machine--or something > similar). > We already knew you were masochistic in your determination to use such out-of-date equipment, but I didn't know you were so sadistic that you are trying to impose it on someone else. If this other person wants a usable computer, can't you or they just buy something from this century? Then you can install the latest Linux Mint and be finished before your dinner is out the oven. Old machines like the one you have /do/ have uses as firewalls or light file servers - but not as desktops.
From: RayLopez99 on 7 Jun 2010 17:00 On Jun 7, 11:28 pm, Peter <pete.ivesAll_stR...(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > > Router's do not replace modems. > > > Unless it's a dsl modem/router combo product. > > Isn't that what he has? A DSL modem. Which in my book is replaced by an > ADSL modem/router. Which I thought the D-Link was. And if it isn't, then > it's no good to him. Yes, that's right. But Peter Ives I've elected to try the old DSL + new Asus switch in lieu of the new ADSL modem/router, and for now at least Windows is having no problem with it...I'll see what the Linux machine does later tonight. RL
From: RayLopez99 on 7 Jun 2010 17:05
On Jun 7, 11:57 pm, David Brown <david.br...(a)hesbynett.removethisbit.no> wrote: > We already knew you were masochistic in your determination to use such > out-of-date equipment, but I didn't know you were so sadistic that you > are trying to impose it on someone else. If this other person wants a > usable computer, can't you or they just buy something from this century? > Then you can install the latest Linux Mint and be finished before > your dinner is out the oven. > > Old machines like the one you have /do/ have uses as firewalls or light > file servers - but not as desktops. But keep in mind the target user is: 1) a cheapskate. She has a Pentium II (slightly older than 1997, but not by much, and with more RAM, I think 512 MB) 2) wants ONLY to surf the web. She keeps all her docs, etc online at Google/Yahoo. So, for her, this setup is ideal. The only complication: she might not want to get ADSL on her phone line (if I can talk her into gettting Skype, to save money, she might though). So she presently wants a dialup modem. There is an old external modem lying around my house somewhere, so if I can find it, I'll be able to easily set up a dialup modem from Damn Small LInux. Internal modems are tricker. That is, if I cannot talk her into using ADSL. That is, assuming I get ADSL working in Linux, which you and others claim is easy to do. i'll see later tonight. Thanks for your help I suppose. If I can get Linux to work I might reconsider all the harsh words I've spoken about it (and its users) over the years. If. RL |