5 ms·

Seriously?! The wifi my partner and childs kit is connected to = VLANd off, goes straight out through a DMZ via its own interface. The stuff i'm testing doesn

Seriously?! The wifi my partner and childs kit is connected to = VLANd off, goes straight out through a DMZ via its own interface. The stuff i'm testing doesn't touch this and I can do what I like through those interfaces without affecting their stuff. Unlike the ISP supplied router if something crashes, I can restart the service rather than pull the power. It doesn't crash anyway, unlike the ISP kit which is temperamental at best. ISP routers already have wifi. Shouldn't the wifi be separate, as rebooting the router will bring it down otherwise? Where do you draw the line?

Aaargh20318 10y ago
> The stuff i'm testing doesn't touch this and I can do what I like through those interfaces without affecting their stuff. Can you pull the power on your testing machine without affecting the wifi ? The point is not that you can usually do it without affecting any other services, the point is that even if you fuck up in the most spectacular way possible and literally fry all the hardware in that box it should not affect any other service than the one you were tinkering with. (Note that in a corporate setting that would not be acceptable either and you'd want failover and no single points of failure). > unlike the ISP supplied router if something crashes, I can restart the service rather than pull the power. It doesn't crash anyway, unlike the ISP kit which is temperamental at best. I'm not saying you should use the ISP-provided router, on the contrary, you should definitely build your own. But build a second machine for your experiments, and third for your fileserver, and a fourth for your torrents, and a fifth for.. etc. etc. > ISP routers already have wifi. Shouldn't the wifi be separate, as rebooting the router will bring it down otherwise? Yes it should certainly be separate. And it is, at least in my house. Router is a simple server-grade machine (IPMI, ECC, etc.) that ONLY does network routing. I use Ubiquiti access points for the WiFi. > Where do you draw the line? Functionally separate services on separate boxes.

Aaargh20318 10y ago

> The stuff i'm testing doesn't touch this and I can do what I like through those interfaces without affecting their stuff. Can you pull the power on your testing machine without affecting the wifi ? The point is not that you can usually do it without affecting any other services, the point is that even if you fuck up in the most spectacular way possible and literally fry all the hardware in that box it should not affect any other service than the one you were tinkering with. (Note that in a corporate setting that would not be acceptable either and you'd want failover and no single points of failure). > unlike the ISP supplied router if something crashes, I can restart the service rather than pull the power. It doesn't crash anyway, unlike the ISP kit which is temperamental at best. I'm not saying you should use the ISP-provided router, on the contrary, you should definitely build your own. But build a second machine for your experiments, and third for your fileserver, and a fourth for your torrents, and a fifth for.. etc. etc. > ISP routers already have wifi. Shouldn't the wifi be separate, as rebooting the router will bring it down otherwise? Yes it should certainly be separate. And it is, at least in my house. Router is a simple server-grade machine (IPMI, ECC, etc.) that ONLY does network routing. I use Ubiquiti access points for the WiFi. > Where do you draw the line? Functionally separate services on separate boxes.