Advanced Router/Networking Question

[Deleted User 298457]

I have just built a terminal PC with pfsense installed.

I plan to put my Sky DG834G in modem only mode.

Here is the problem:

My now Sky 'modem' is downstairs. CAT5 runs into a 5 port dumb switch, then from that switch, CAT5 runs upstairs into the attic into another dumb switch, then the Pfsense box plugs in here.

Will I still be able to do PPPoA?

Will the router which is now a modem still have an IP?

 

[bremen1874]

I've never used pfsense, but...

Presumably it has WAN side and LAN side connections?

If you connect it up as you describe you may be able to get it to connect out to the Internet. Unfortunately any other equipment that’s also plugged into the two switches you mention will be on the WAN side of the pfsense box.

You need two separate networks. One from the WAN side of the pfsense box to the modem and Internet. And another from the LAN side to the internal equipment.

 

[Deleted User 298457]

Damn. I suppose in that case I have two solutions:

Powerline networking - create another physical network
VLANs - tag the modem some how - however I think this will confuse the matter even more.

Edit: Even though they're on the WAN side, surely the IP routing will resolve this? As in nothing bad from the WAN side can enter because the host use private IP's?

 

[bremen1874]

Having the both the WAN and LAN sides of firewall connected the same network would rather defeat the purpose of having a firewall in the first place (even if you could get it to work.

For VLANs you're going to need managed switches (unless I've missed something).

Powerline adapters sound like a workable option. It really depends on what you were trying to achieve in the first place.

Edit: Even though they're on the WAN side, surely the IP routing will resolve this? As in nothing bad from the WAN side can enter because the host use private IP's?

If this was true no one would need to bother with firewalls and would just need NAT. NAT will offer some protection, but I can't see many people recommending it as an option.

 

[Deleted User 298457]

Having the both the WAN and LAN sides of firewall connected the same network would rather defeat the purpose of having a firewall in the first place (even if you could get it to work.

For VLANs you're going to need managed switches (unless I've missed something).

Powerline adapters sound like a workable option. It really depends on what you were trying to achieve in the first place.



If this was true no one would need to bother with firewalls and would just need NAT. NAT will offer some protection, but I can't see many people recommending it as an option.

Well inherently NAT is the best firewall protection available, hence why IPv6 is such an issue.

I'm almost on the verge of running a new phoneline in the loft and relocating everything but I know this will cause more issues than its solves with attenuation...