Computer networking question....

[Chuck Wintle]

I plan to purchase a new PC soon and wish to network it with my old computer. I also plan to upgrade to DSL service.
Is it better to get an ADSL modem with a built in 4 port router or a stand alone modem and attach a router to it? The built in router option seems, to me, a good way to go.

[John Miliunas]

I plan to purchase a new PC soon and wish to network it with my old computer. I also plan to upgrade to DSL service.
Is it better to get an ADSL modem with a built in 4 port router or a stand alone modem and attach a router to it? The built in router option seems, to me, a good way to go.

Charles, I think either option is viable, but I've always been one to go with "seperates" whenever possible. i.e., a seperate printer, scanner and/or fax, rather than the all-in-ones. That way, if one part of it goes bad, you don't loose the whole thing. Same goes here. I believe it would also help in troubleshooting if there's some connectivity issue(s) going on. In other words, if you're having trouble connecting with one of your workstation nodes, you may be hard-pressed to know if it's the router, configuration, DSL connection or otherwise. With a seperate modem, you can pretty easily figure out if it's a modem issue or something going goofy with the DSL connection at the Telco. Just MHO, of course and this, coming from a guy who doesn't have DSL or cable available in his area. :mad: (I do, however, have satellite (Direcway) and *have* to use seperates, regardless of opinion.) :cool:

[Chris Johnson]

I agree with you John. The only thing I would add is to make sure that if you go the separate component route, that you make sure that NAT is only turned on on one device. Failure to do so will still allow the system to work, but at a much higher loss in speed and packet errors. When our Termial services clients come on board and complain of slow service it almost always that problem on their end.

At the risk of a flame session I will say that for transmission quality and continuity, the Linksys stuff is noticably worse that most of the others. A simple switch to most others (SMC or Netgear as inexpensive examples) has proven to be a speed improvement in every case. I hate to see this, as I generally like Linksys stuff.



Charles, I think either option is viable, but I've always been one to go with "seperates" whenever possible. i.e., a seperate printer, scanner and/or fax, rather than the all-in-ones. That way, if one part of it goes bad, you don't loose the whole thing. Same goes here. I believe it would also help in troubleshooting if there's some connectivity issue(s) going on. In other words, if you're having trouble connecting with one of your workstation nodes, you may be hard-pressed to know if it's the router, configuration, DSL connection or otherwise. With a seperate modem, you can pretty easily figure out if it's a modem issue or something going goofy with the DSL connection at the Telco. Just MHO, of course and this, coming from a guy who doesn't have DSL or cable available in his area. :mad: (I do, however, have satellite (Direcway) and *have* to use seperates, regardless of opinion.) :cool:

[Chuck Wintle]

What I have decided to do for now it to connect my two computerswith a crossover lan cable and just go with the adsl modem.

[Chris Johnson]

Remember, Firewall, Antivirus and spy/bundleware stopper. Fast and naked is no way to run. Have fun, but a $40 router is a better way to go.



What I have decided to do for now it to connect my two computerswith a crossover lan cable and just go with the adsl modem.

[Jim Becker]

Because there are multiple DSL modem types, it's safer to have your router separate from your DSL modem, unless it's coming from your provider and you know it will work. But if you change providers someday...then you could have an issue! I've been using the same Linksys router for both cable modem and DSL service for years. Only the modems have changed.