OS2 World.Com Forum

Subject  :  OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  dljone9 dljone9@os2world.com
Date  :  20 Dec, 2006 on 21:55
Can anyone offer fairly detalied instructions on setting up an OS/2
Server as a router (gateway)? This is for a corporate lab, and I have
been tasked to set up a dual NIC Aurora server (latest fixes) in this
fashion.

The scenario would be this: the OS/2 server in question would have
1 network card connected to the network - other would run in to a
small router and must act as the gateway for other PC's plugged in to
that same router (mix of Window 2000 and OS/2 clients). Both NICs
on the Aurora box will be static (192.168.1.x) - of course, I can put
the router on a diff. subnet (192.168.2.x) if need be.

I am aware of the "router on a floppy" package on Hobbes, but the
"powers that be" balk at that idea, as they want this Aurora server
to stay like it is (it runs an internal web server). Using the router
as a gateway isn't an option either - this is a corporation and sadly
some businesses just insist on doing things the hard way

Thanks in adavnce for any guidance...


Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  JLKT
Date  :  21 Dec, 2006 on 13:32
I would think u need Injoy firewall for this setup. The only thing is that I am not sure how well can Injoy cope with heavy web traffic such as bittorrent and p2p.

I have tried clarkconnect (linux based) and monowall (freebsd based). However, none of which can stay up very long when the network has heavy p2p traffic. The box simply won't respond to pings after sometime. The monowall box is much better than the clarkconnect box, which is usually down in around 5 days or so. My current monowall box is up more than 2 weeks without reboot.

I have not tried to use os/2 as the router for my kind of network, but I would say the results are pretty much the same as monowall? Perhaps others can give feedbacks to how reliable os/2 would be as a router?

Regards
JLKT


Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  Ian Manners
Date  :  21 Dec, 2006 on 17:07
My job over the xmas break is to finish an article I promised someone 3-4 years back for Voice, and its all about my network, with two seperate ADSL lines, main server which is also the router, with injoy firewall, Apache, Weasel, FTPServer, MajorMajor, Bind, and a few other apps on it, with 3 NIC's. On the internal side I have a collection of Mac, OS/2 box's, RS/6000's, and various PS/2 PC's but no windows so beyond the windows basics I can't help much there. I use Netbeui and TCP/IP, not one over the other.

ie, give me 1-2 weeks and you'll have the basics though be warned every network is different, as is every firewall setup.

To use OS/2 as a basic router you dont need Injoy FW but it sure comes in handy for dropping a lot of rubbish and blacklisting externals that try to hack into your internal network. OS/2 build in firewall is still good for dropping ICMP packets, and slices of unwanted IP's.

Some links to try:-

http://www.tavi.co.uk/os2pages/firewall/
http://www.os2docs.org/

and I know there is someone out there that has a webpage on setting up OS/2 with tips on routing but cant remember who it was

The one disk router package on hobbes will still give you a good working idea of the files to look at.

Cheers
Ian Manners
http://www.os2site.com/


Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  Terry tgindy@yahoo.com
Date  :  21 Dec, 2006 on 19:33

Ian Manners (21 Dec, 2006 17:12):
My job over the xmas break is to finish an article I promised someone 3-4 years back for Voice, and its all about my network, with two seperate ADSL lines, main server which is also the router, with injoy firewall, Apache, Weasel, FTPServer, MajorMajor, Bind, and a few other apps on it, with 3 NIC's. On the internal side I have a collection of Mac, OS/2 box's, RS/6000's, and various PS/2 PC's but no windows so beyond the windows basics I can't help much there. I use Netbeui and TCP/IP, not one over the other.

I am thanking you in advance for the time you are taking to instruct the eCS-OS/2 community of the diversity of your networking setup. Just your last sentence, quoted above, will be worth doing and reading the article.

Like anything else computing, it is one thing to understand what networking aspects are possible let alone to implement them without a path on which to run.


Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  dljone9 dljone9@os2world.com
Date  :  21 Dec, 2006 on 21:11

JLKT (21 Dec, 2006 13:32):
I would think u need Injoy firewall for this setup. The only thing is that I am not sure how well can Injoy cope with heavy web traffic such as bittorrent and p2p.

I have tried clarkconnect (linux based) and monowall (freebsd based). However, none of which can stay up very long when the network has heavy p2p traffic. The box simply won't respond to pings after sometime. The monowall box is much better than the clarkconnect box, which is usually down in around 5 days or so. My current monowall box is up more than 2 weeks without reboot.

I have not tried to use os/2 as the router for my kind of network, but I would say the results are pretty much the same as monowall? Perhaps others can give feedbacks to how reliable os/2 would be as a router?

Regards
JLKT


Many thanks for the input, guys - I do not believe that I will be
abel to purchase new software for this project (ala InJoy). Would
hope to simply whatever configuration options exist in OS2.

I am looking at some of the helpful firewall links, and there is a
good deal of guidance there, if not specific to this task.


Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  Sebadoh sys3175@optonline.net
Date  :  22 Dec, 2006 on 06:02
Take it from me on this one and don't bother with injoy. I ran it for many years and it is getting considerably outdated and I noticed some severe problems with network traffic. A cheap hardware router will work many times better and most offer html configuration which works fine with OS/2.


dljone9 (21 Dec, 2006 21:11):

JLKT (21 Dec, 2006 13:32):
I would think u need Injoy firewall for this setup. The only thing is that I am not sure how well can Injoy cope with heavy web traffic such as bittorrent and p2p.

I have tried clarkconnect (linux based) and monowall (freebsd based). However, none of which can stay up very long when the network has heavy p2p traffic. The box simply won't respond to pings after sometime. The monowall box is much better than the clarkconnect box, which is usually down in around 5 days or so. My current monowall box is up more than 2 weeks without reboot.

I have not tried to use os/2 as the router for my kind of network, but I would say the results are pretty much the same as monowall? Perhaps others can give feedbacks to how reliable os/2 would be as a router?

Regards
JLKT


Many thanks for the input, guys - I do not believe that I will be
abel to purchase new software for this project (ala InJoy). Would
hope to simply whatever configuration options exist in OS2.

I am looking at some of the helpful firewall links, and there is a
good deal of guidance there, if not specific to this task.



Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  vingfel vingfel@excite.com
Date  :  22 Dec, 2006 on 11:32
IMHO, you should considere Smothwall or IPCop. Both are free and run on fairly old PC (200MHz, 64Mb ram,500Mb hard drive), and are really stable. And they provide transparent proxy caching and VPN possibility.

I had an IPCop running during 1 years without any problem. And a Smoothwall installed here, just for port forwarding, ran during nearly 400 days today. We never think about this old PC.

IPCop and Smoothwall, are, if I understand well, linux distro just limitd to it's router and firewall function. I

Both products seem quite similar to me.


Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  JLKT
Date  :  22 Dec, 2006 on 13:22
IMHO, IPcop and Smoothwall are pretty similar to Clarkconnect which I have used in the past. But Clarkconnect is not that stable when subject to heavy p2p traffic. Is IPcop and smoothwall any better?

Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  Sebadoh sys3175@optonline.net
Date  :  22 Dec, 2006 on 14:13
Again, if you are going to go that route you might as well use a hardware router with firewall functions, most of them are based on linux and do basically the same thing without using nearly as much electricity and with stability across all amounts of traffic you throw at them. I was very much a supporter of PC based firewall for a long time. I used injoy firewall for 5 years with very good stability. (including over a 700 day uptime). However I strated to notice problems navigating certain secure websites. Then after a hardware failure I decided it wasn't worth the energy to get everything up and running again and bought a linksys wireless router w/ firewall. Configured the rules the same as my injoy setup was and it has been working flawlessly. The old OS/2 router still functions as my network server and fileserver but it no longer handles my nat.


vingfel (22 Dec, 2006 11:32):
IMHO, you should considere Smothwall or IPCop. Both are free and run on fairly old PC (200MHz, 64Mb ram,500Mb hard drive), and are really stable. And they provide transparent proxy caching and VPN possibility.

I had an IPCop running during 1 years without any problem. And a Smoothwall installed here, just for port forwarding, ran during nearly 400 days today. We never think about this old PC.

IPCop and Smoothwall, are, if I understand well, linux distro just limitd to it's router and firewall function. I

Both products seem quite similar to me.



Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  JLKT
Date  :  23 Dec, 2006 on 02:11
Sebadoh,

I also used a dlink router for sometime. But the nos. of connections on a bittorrent p2p network cause the router to max out every 3, 4 days or so, and i have to restart the router. Change the router to clarkconnect, still the same thing. Now using monowall, better but I could never get an uptime of 700 days.

Would a linksys wireless router solve my p2p related network/routing problems?

Regards
JLKT


Sebadoh (22 Dec, 2006 14:13):
Again, if you are going to go that route you might as well use a hardware router with firewall functions, most of them are based on linux and do basically the same thing without using nearly as much electricity and with stability across all amounts of traffic you throw at them. I was very much a supporter of PC based firewall for a long time. I used injoy firewall for 5 years with very good stability. (including over a 700 day uptime). However I strated to notice problems navigating certain secure websites. Then after a hardware failure I decided it wasn't worth the energy to get everything up and running again and bought a linksys wireless router w/ firewall. Configured the rules the same as my injoy setup was and it has been working flawlessly. The old OS/2 router still functions as my network server and fileserver but it no longer handles my nat.


vingfel (22 Dec, 2006 11:32):
IMHO, you should considere Smothwall or IPCop. Both are free and run on fairly old PC (200MHz, 64Mb ram,500Mb hard drive), and are really stable. And they provide transparent proxy caching and VPN possibility.

I had an IPCop running during 1 years without any problem. And a Smoothwall installed here, just for port forwarding, ran during nearly 400 days today. We never think about this old PC.

IPCop and Smoothwall, are, if I understand well, linux distro just limitd to it's router and firewall function. I

Both products seem quite similar to me.




Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  vingfel vingfel@excite.com
Date  :  23 Dec, 2006 on 10:42
I use p2p often. And never eny problem with smoothwall or IPCOP.

And the advantage of a PC used as router with IPCop/Smoothwall, is the caching. I relly have the feeling that it increase my bworsing speed/efficiency.
If you do not need/want the caching, then yes go for a small hardware router box.
Anyway, I am convinced than an IPCop or SmothWall are better, as they have much more settings and can be upgraded and/or get patches. And addons can be added. But do you need these features?

A small hardware box will allow you to have all common features you may need, and some more. It's small, silent , and most of the models are really stable. But no proxy and caching.
A Smoothwal / IPCop is a router full of interresting features. Added to this, you can have a proxy and/or caching. But it's a PC with fans and hard drive -> some noise and more consumption than a small box. (I connected all my fans to 5V instea of 12V. The only noise is the hard driv now

And it give me an excuse for putting back in service one of my old PC. Oops... I hope nobody in my close family will read this...

Voila.


Subject  :  Re:OS/2, router, file sharing apps
Author  :  dljone9 dljone9@os2world.com
Date  :  23 Dec, 2006 on 16:36
just wanted to change "subject", so as to not mistake it for
responses to my orig. post

Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  Dobber
Date  :  23 Dec, 2006 on 18:43
If you decide to go with a store bought router - pick up one that can run dd-wrt. FYI, it's a linux based firmware based off of the Linksys firmware source they were forced to release due to the GPL. It works on a multitude of wifi routers. The firmware is highly configurable and opens up more functionality than the stock firmware. If you are looking at p2p traffic across it, there is a ton of options to "shape" your traffic (QoS).

Homepage: http://www.dd-wrt.com
Supported Devices: http://dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Supported_Devices

FYI, I'm using a cheap Belkin router with dd-wrt to bridge my OS/2 PC to my wifi only network. Instead of running cat5 to all four levels of my house, I'm just using wireless for everything. But I don't have wireless running on OS/2, so I use cat5 from my NIC to my router. The router connects via wifi to another router downstairs, which connects me to the internet and my home network. This Wiki has tons of HOWTOs with specific scenarios.


Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  Ben Dragon
Date  :  23 Dec, 2006 on 20:29
There is essentially, one way to do this with variations depending on your LAN.

I use a dedicated computer in between my cable modem and my router. I use two NICs. One handles the modem and one handles the router. The router has eight computers connected to it. I have many online servers and services run from this computer and I use P2P via Python Bittorrent. For example, IRCd, SMTP/POP, DDNS, two http servers hosting many websites, FTPd, INIserver, mySQL

I have tried two firewall/NAT setups configured for the NIC that has the cable modem; Linkgard's SafeFire and FX's Injoy Firewall.

I used SafeFire for years without a hitch, no load drags it down and it's as transparent as any that you could hope for and pinging is always available. It is very stable and it's free.

However, there is no GUI so all adjustments are done by editing a text based config file. If you know what you're doing, that's not a problem. Reloading the config requires a complete shutdown and restart of the product... not the machine. There is no automation available with this product and it gives no feedback whatsoever.

This is where InJoy Firewall really shines. It gives loads of feedback and you can setup rules of all sorts to do whatever you want to do... and you can see it doing it in real time. There is still a steep learning curve for configuration especially if you are new to firewalls/NATs, if not, then you won't have a problem.

Is InJoy as powerful as SafeFire and does it give as good a throughput? Well, that's a good question and here's a good answer; depends.

If you are using the default security settings on high, then loads of rules are used and there is definitely a performance hit. If you bog the firewall down with loads of ridiculous rules, (or even necessary rules), then you can bring the product to it's knees and your previous torrent will become a drip.

I have a tight rule set, not a strangling one, but a tight one. And it works fine. Out of the box I found InJoy on Security Level 8 tended to be a problem. A massive memory leak appeared and performance quickly dropped off. 1 gig of RAM evaporated and the swapper file swelled. Restarts of the product, and the machine, (which was sometimes necessary), restored performance... for a short while and then the memory disappeared again as the decline started over.

However, after I adjusted and tweaked Security Level 8, the product now works quite well. I got rid of all unnecessary rules, (some at that setting, really aren't useful unless you have only low traffic through a low number of, or one, comps).

Now, I can have all my servers working and snappy and many, many torrents running concurrently and at times, maybe thirty or more... I er... buy... a lot of music and software. Ahmm.

Tweaking is the answer to InJoy and right now I'm happy with the way it works and the security that it gives me. I won't be going back to SafeFire though its performance is excellent, the realtime viewing of attacks on my machine is invaluable and the sophisticated ruleset and interface of InJoy really clinches it for me.

Just plug your LAN comps into the router, turn off the DHCP and give permanent IPs to those comps and regulate and oversee their connections with the firewall.

No money for new investments? Then SafeFire is your choice. It's free and easily available on hobbes.

Of course, if you like neither of those choices, then there is also the built-in eCS/OS2 firewall and the ipforwarding option, but while those two together get the job done, it's a very simple setup and don't expect much control. Zampa is your friend here.

If you don't want to use a router, then just add as many NICs to the machine as you have comps on the LAN,(if that's practical), or simply use BNC cabling and string them all on one line utilizing only one NIC for the LAN WRT the firewall machine.

The only real problem with BNC is that you'll only get a 10meg transfer rate. If that rate's not a problem for you then neither will BNC be. If you're trying to do it on the cheap, then that's the way for you.

I hope this helps.



Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  JLKT
Date  :  26 Dec, 2006 on 01:36
IMHO, one of the important consideration of a pc based router is that it must be able to work without a monitor, i.e. headless. AFAIK, it is not that easy to do so with os/2 as some of the config is still required to do so using WPS. This is where distro such as monowall and others come in. They are totally configurable via the web browser.

This is also the reason I have not used os/2 as a router in my network. Perhaps others have done a headless os/2 server and can share some tips?


Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  Sebadoh sys3175@optonline.net
Date  :  26 Dec, 2006 on 05:14
I have never noticed a slowdown which wasn't directly related to my cable modem connection. The linksys I use is a newer model 54g+ speedbooster and seems to not have any issues with bittorrent.. I even have multiple pc's on my network downloading simultaniously and have never noticed a problem.


JLKT (23 Dec, 2006 02:11):
Sebadoh,

I also used a dlink router for sometime. But the nos. of connections on a bittorrent p2p network cause the router to max out every 3, 4 days or so, and i have to restart the router. Change the router to clarkconnect, still the same thing. Now using monowall, better but I could never get an uptime of 700 days.

Would a linksys wireless router solve my p2p related network/routing problems?

Regards
JLKT


Sebadoh (22 Dec, 2006 14:13):
Again, if you are going to go that route you might as well use a hardware router with firewall functions, most of them are based on linux and do basically the same thing without using nearly as much electricity and with stability across all amounts of traffic you throw at them. I was very much a supporter of PC based firewall for a long time. I used injoy firewall for 5 years with very good stability. (including over a 700 day uptime). However I strated to notice problems navigating certain secure websites. Then after a hardware failure I decided it wasn't worth the energy to get everything up and running again and bought a linksys wireless router w/ firewall. Configured the rules the same as my injoy setup was and it has been working flawlessly. The old OS/2 router still functions as my network server and fileserver but it no longer handles my nat.


vingfel (22 Dec, 2006 11:32):
IMHO, you should considere Smothwall or IPCop. Both are free and run on fairly old PC (200MHz, 64Mb ram,500Mb hard drive), and are really stable. And they provide transparent proxy caching and VPN possibility.

I had an IPCop running during 1 years without any problem. And a Smoothwall installed here, just for port forwarding, ran during nearly 400 days today. We never think about this old PC.

IPCop and Smoothwall, are, if I understand well, linux distro just limitd to it's router and firewall function. I

Both products seem quite similar to me.





Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  Sebadoh sys3175@optonline.net
Date  :  26 Dec, 2006 on 05:16
Headless isn't all that important.. I simply turn the monitor off . Lol. you can easily run OS/2 headless using another utility to allow you remote access to your desktop. I have never done it but I have serviced a few embedded headless os/2 machines over the years.


JLKT (26 Dec, 2006 01:36):
IMHO, one of the important consideration of a pc based router is that it must be able to work without a monitor, i.e. headless. AFAIK, it is not that easy to do so with os/2 as some of the config is still required to do so using WPS. This is where distro such as monowall and others come in. They are totally configurable via the web browser.

This is also the reason I have not used os/2 as a router in my network. Perhaps others have done a headless os/2 server and can share some tips?



Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  hausmaus
Date  :  04 Mar, 2007 on 22:34

Ben Dragon (23 Dec, 2006 20:35):

No money for new investments? Then
SafeFire is your choice. It's free and easily available on hobbes.

From hobbes:

Search results for: safefire

0 items matched your search
No files found

...is there another place this can be found (or am I looking for the wrong thing)? I'd like to set up my BBS machine to be my network's router/NAT as the Linksys, as many people have touted, just doesn't cut the mustard anymore for my needs.

Thanks,
Sean


Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  vingfel vingfel@excite.com
Date  :  05 Mar, 2007 on 22:32
My IPCop and Smoothwall ruen without monitor. All the config are done by a web page, after the system booted.

Okay, during installation and original card and network settings, you need a monitor. But when you are sure that it run, simply disable the errors stops in the BIOS, and you are ok to run the box without monitor, mouse and keyb, depending of the BIOS. And when the system booted and is ready to work, then there is a small 3 tone beep, like "boop, baaap, beep".

I personally really like IPCop and Smoothwall. Did somebody noticed?


Subject  :  Re:OS/2 System as a router
Author  :  Ben Dragon
Date  :  07 Mar, 2007 on 14:01

hausmaus (04 Mar, 2007 22:34):
...is there another place this can be found (or am I looking for the wrong thing)? I'd like to set up my BBS machine to be my network's router/NAT as the Linksys, as many people have touted, just doesn't cut the mustard anymore for my needs.

If you still can't find a copy, E-mail me.

---


Powered by UltraBoard 2000 <www.ub2k.com>