Suggestions for a box to run ssh port forwarding.
in [UK Linux]
|
Prev: Netgear SC101 broken mirror
Next: HP610C
From: Martin Liddle on 12 Nov 2007 04:38 Some months ago this group suggested ssh port forwarding as a solution to a problem I was experiencing. I am pleased to say that this has proved to be highly effective and I would now like to have a dedicated box available to perform this function. The data rates are not high. What is the cheapest box (both purchase price and running cost) for this application, a router running Linux firmware, a NAS box or what? -- Martin Liddle, Tynemouth Computer Services, 3 Kentmere Way, Staveley, Chesterfield, Derbyshire, S43 3TW. Web site: <http://www.tynecomp.co.uk>.
From: Gordon Henderson on 12 Nov 2007 05:53 In article <IaLuuess8BOHFwGj(a)tynecomp.invalid>, Martin Liddle <News-reply_spam_a(a)tynecomp.co.uk> wrote: >Some months ago this group suggested ssh port forwarding as a solution >to a problem I was experiencing. I am pleased to say that this has >proved to be highly effective and I would now like to have a dedicated >box available to perform this function. The data rates are not high. >What is the cheapest box (both purchase price and running cost) for this >application, a router running Linux firmware, a NAS box or what? Might have been me, as I use and advocate SSH in this manner.. But what's your use/budget/desire? Any old PC ought to work OK, which is what I presume you're using... But if you're looking for new, and you're up for building your own, I've used these motherboards as routers in the past: http://www.icp-epia.co.uk/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=118 That plus a case, some memory plus a laptop drive ought to be under �250 in total (plus your own time to put it together) Maybe a bit more if you need to put it in a rackmout case. Gordon
From: Chris Davies on 12 Nov 2007 05:32 Martin Liddle <news09(a)tynecomp.co.uk> wrote: > What is the cheapest box (both purchase price and running cost) for this > application, a router running Linux firmware, a NAS box or what? You'll probably have to remind us to what "this application" refers. (Message ID if there's a thread, or summarise here.) Chris
From: Martin Liddle on 12 Nov 2007 07:34 In message <dnml05xvr5.ln2(a)news.roaima.co.uk>, Chris Davies <chris-usenet(a)roaima.co.uk> writes >Martin Liddle <news09(a)tynecomp.co.uk> wrote: >> What is the cheapest box (both purchase price and running cost) for this >> application, a router running Linux firmware, a NAS box or what? > >You'll probably have to remind us to what "this application" refers. >(Message ID if there's a thread, or summarise here.) > Sorry if my request wasn't clear. We have an in house developed application that listens for incoming requests on a particular port. When we are sitting behind a router that we can control then we simply port forward to the relevant server. However we often have the server in locations such as hotels and leisure centres who can provide some form of broadband but either do not have the technical competence or restrictive policies that means port forwarding is not an option. The solution we have adopted, based on a suggestion made in this newsgroup, is to use ssh to establish a connection from the remote location back to a machine at base and use ssh port forwarding to route the requests to the server at the remote location. This works remarkably well. However the machine we are using back at base is old (the fan on the power supply is getting noisy) and not very power efficient. I would like to replace it with something more modern which hopefully will be reliable and low power consumption; better still if it is cheap. -- Martin Liddle, Tynemouth Computer Services, 3 Kentmere Way, Staveley, Chesterfield, Derbyshire, S43 3TW. Web site: <http://www.tynecomp.co.uk>.
From: alexd on 12 Nov 2007 08:15
Martin Liddle wrote: > In message <dnml05xvr5.ln2(a)news.roaima.co.uk>, Chris Davies > <chris-usenet(a)roaima.co.uk> writes >>Martin Liddle <news09(a)tynecomp.co.uk> wrote: >>> What is the cheapest box (both purchase price and running cost) for this >>> application, a router running Linux firmware, a NAS box or what? >> >>You'll probably have to remind us to what "this application" refers. >>(Message ID if there's a thread, or summarise here.) >> > Sorry if my request wasn't clear. We have an in house developed > application that listens for incoming requests on a particular port. > When we are sitting behind a router that we can control then we simply > port forward to the relevant server. However we often have the server > in locations such as hotels and leisure centres who can provide some > form of broadband but either do not have the technical competence or > restrictive policies that means port forwarding is not an option. The > solution we have adopted, based on a suggestion made in this newsgroup, > is to use ssh to establish a connection from the remote location back to > a machine at base and use ssh port forwarding to route the requests to > the server at the remote location. This works remarkably well. However > the machine we are using back at base is old (the fan on the power > supply is getting noisy) and not very power efficient. I would like to > replace it with something more modern which hopefully will be reliable > and low power consumption; better still if it is cheap. Good, fast /and/ cheap? Tee hee. Depending on how much load you're expecting, you could try a router running OpenWRT. Last time I looked, Linksys WRT54GS [32M RAM, 8M flash] were plentiful on eBay for 30 odd quid a pop. Most definitely fits the cheap/low power consumption part of the brief, but make sure you check http://toh.openwrt.org before splashing the cash. At that price, you could even have one at each end and run an OpenVPN tunnel across betwixt. Another possibility is a box made by DBAM; they're dedicated bandwidth management/monitoring appliances with a fancy Java UI, and they happen to do SSH tunnelling and compression as a side effect. However, they aren't cheap. -- <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm(a)ale.cx) 13:04:28 up 1 day, 1:42, 1 user, load average: 0.14, 0.09, 0.09 50,000 watts of funking power |