Matt Causey schrieb:
On 12 Jun 2009, at 06:46, Graham Murray <gra...@gmurray.org.uk> wrote:
Norman Rieß <nor...@smash-net.org> writes:
What do you want to do with your accesspoint. You will need a bridge
to a wired network if you want your ap attached to that wired
network. This is quite usual though...
Without a bridge to a wired network, only the wlan systems are
connected and can not connect to your wired systems.
Would it not normally be better to route between the wireless and wired
networks, with appropriate firewall rules in place, rather than bridging
them?
That is the intent of a project I'm working on, and I think it will
work well. However most folks don't need the additional complexity of
multiple networks. In that case just bridging to the existing subnet
is sufficient.
It really depends on the users needs. I said this was quite usual
because with bridging produces the behaviour someone expects from an out
of the box accesspoint.
If someone wants to control the connections or create a dmz or whatever,
routing would be the way, yes.
In Grant's situation routing should be the better choice, as he seems to
want to have a router with wlan, rather than a simple accesspoint. The
wlan becomes the local network and the wired nic, the web. So this would
again produce the behavious one expects from a out of the box router. If
he later one create a wlan-router setup, i dare say he would bridge wlan
and local wired and NAT/route that to the wired web nic.
But that are my views... as i said, it depends on the users needs.
