I've been out of the networking game for the last decade and would appreciate some input from those of you who have a little more recent experience.

 

Here is my situation:

I am hitting Comcast's 250GB data cap at around the 25th of every month.  I need just a bit more data but don't want to upgrade to the business class plan.

 

My neighbor uses under 50GB/month of his plan and has agreed to allow me to leech 50GB off of his wireless network.  He gave me the wep key to access his network but I found that he is using DSL so when I switch to his network my general browsing experience isn't great.

 

What I would like to do is only route my sabnzbd downloads through his connection and only for about a week a month so I would need to be able to easily switch the connection used.  At the same time I need my unraid server to stay connected to my network as well so I can still access the files on it.

 

Proposed solution:

It seems like I need to either add a wireless pci card to my unraid server and setup some sort of script to easily modify the routing to my usenet provider or else I need to get a second (or different) wireless access point (currently I have an Airport Extreme) that would allow me to bridge to my neighbors network but only route a portion of the traffic through it.

 

Can anyone give me any input on the best way to accomplish this?  Maybe tell me a router or wireless card you have used and liked that would play well with unraid?

 

I do happen to have an old linksys pci MIMo 802.11G card laying around I was planning on trying out tonight but I have no idea how I would even configure a wireless card in linux.

 

 

 

Not sure how much you willing to spend on this - paying overage fees might be cheaper.   I have done similar things with clients, using SonicWall TZ units. A TZ200 wireless would work well. Up here in canada, they run about $450. But you can bridge the wireless to that other network and easily make a routing entry to route traffic, from unRaid outbound on port x, to Y network (being the wireless). Then you simply enable and disable it with a check mark when you need to.

This unit would replace your current router, whatever that is. You could still keep your current Wireless and hang it off the TZ and still have it providing local wireless access.

 

The more advanced Linux guys though can probable script up something to modify the routing table on the unRaid box and you just need to get a new wireless unit capable of supporting bridge mode. Also, does your buddies? Most units if they are in wireless bridge mode will no longer serve client access... something to keep in mind.

 

Shawn

 

There are no overage fees, they are threatening to just shut me off and not allow me to purchase internet service through them for six months.  Since there are no other decent providers in the area (dsl is pretty slow here) I really don't want to let that happen.

 

Your suggestion sounds perfect and like exactly what I need.  My buddy also has an Apple Airport so there isn't much flexibility on his end which is why I was hoping to find something that would just act like a client on my end.  I actually used a spare windows laptop for a while to bridge the network and do the internet connection sharing which worked but made everything else slow and irritated my girlfriend.  Then the windows laptop died and I don't feel like buying another just for that which left me wanting a more appropriate solution that would only redirect certain traffic. 

 

A real router.  I have just been out of the game so long I didn't know which model to buy, but if a TZ 200 will do the trick I will pick one up off of ebay tomorrow.

 

Thank you so much for the heads up, and in case anyone else has any good ideas or competing routers they like I am willing to spend up to a few hundred bucks.

 

 

I would give it a day or two to see what other suggestions you get before making a purchase...

Those joys of Canadian major ISP, crap limit of 120GB, but only a max of $50 for overage fee per month. For a 50MB connection, not bad...

 

Shawn

 

So am I correct that the wifi on this unit can both be a client to my neighbors connection and server as an access point for the wireless devices in my house?  Or do I need a second access point somehow?  Would it still have a WAN port I would plug into my comcast modem and would I somehow be able to configure it to realize there are two available WAN connections (my neighbors and the comcast) and to route traffic as I wish?

 

Can you confirm for me that the SonicWall can be a wifi client for another wireless access point that does not support layer 2 bridging?  I am thinking just like my laptop, it would just be a client, and perform nat to make it look like all traffic was going through that client.  My neighbors Airport does not support bridging so it would need to work just like a regular wifi client.

 

If not, worst case I guess I could just get one of those $50 wifi bridges people use to get their gaming consoles online and in the sonicwall treat it as a second wired network (that would work right?), but I imagine the antenna in those would probably not be very good.

 

Can you help me out with the terminology a bit when I am researching this?  I said bridge initially but I think that is incorrect, I really want a router that supports two WANs, one of them being wired, one being wireless.

 

Is there a common term for this?

Answering my own question here, it looks like the term is client mode or client bridge.  http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Client_Mode_Wireless

 

 

have a look at dual wan routers with 3G (4G)

if you have 3g in the neighborhood and a unlimited subscription

 

worked for me when i lived in Singapore

now i use the same router to balance 2 ISp's

if you need to go the wireless way.. ddr-wrt has some possibilities ... but not sure if it load balances or you can setup routing to the unraid specifically

 

 

Spent hours researching this tonight, getting a bit bleary eyed at this point. Seems like there are a few possibilities, not loving any of them but they may work.

 

Simplest may be to just put another network card in the unraid server and then use one of those Xbox/Playstation type wired to wireless adapters that you configure before plugging in.  I doubt the range on them is good though.  I think I can use iptables in unraid to route specific traffic to each adapter.  Maybe I can find one with an external antenna to boost the range?

 

DD-WRT seems to have solutions but if I am understanding correctly you need two of them as one DD-WRT router needs to run in client mode which use the wifi solely as a client to my neighbors wifi and I need a second router to run wifi for local clients as well as to route which traffic goes to which connection.

 

The original SonicWall solution sounds the easiest by far, I just haven't confirmed that the SonicWall can run as a client bridge (since my neighbors wifi doesn't have a bridge mode) and still provide wifi for my local laptops.

 

I looked at the ZyXel with 3G and it looked like almost exactly what I wanted, except I don't want the second connection to be 3G, I want it to be wifi. 

 

 

I may have just gotten very lucky, I just stumbled across an old Fortigate 60 firewall I used to use at work 6 years ago or so that we never got around to disposing of.  It has two WAN ports!

 

I think I can just flash DD-WRT onto one of my old WRT54G routers and use it in client mode to hook up to my neighbors wifi and then do all of the routing in the Fortigate, then use my existing airport for my internal wifi.

 

I'll update the thread if it all works out.  It'll be a week or so since I just had to buy a power supply for the Fortigate off of ebay and won't see it until next week.

 

 

UnRAID only supports a single NIC.

UnRAID only supports a single NIC.

 

unRAID only activates the first NIC it finds.  You can manually bring up secondary interfaces.

Hopefully the Fortigate works - would be the easiest and cheapest for you...

 

That being said, a few things. With are the wireless units I have looks at you have two (at least among what we are discussing here, there more) two options. Client mode or "bridge" mode. Once you go into bridging mode, the WAP no longer supports wireless clients. it is a "bridge" between your LAN and the other LAN. And the same with the device at the other end. I have seen some were it will bridge to an existing wireless and no require the other source to be a bridge as well.

 

[urlLayer 2 Wireless Bridging]SonicWall[/url] From this link, you can see the TZ wireless models all support wireless bridging. You could then hang another basic WAP off one of the ports to provide wireless services. If you want to wait a few days, I have a TZ200 at work I can test this out on, create a bridge and see what I need on the other end as well. I will can also test if while in bridging mode I can also use the Virtual Access Points to provide local wireless or not.

 

So, you can do it with the TZ unit. You might need another WAP at your place to conituue to provide wireless, and may need some more gear at your buddies. I will need to test. But, like I mentioned, you would log in, make the route statement, and simply click it when you need it.

 

Shawn

UnRAID only supports a single NIC.

 

unRAID only activates the first NIC it finds.  You can manually bring up secondary interfaces.

 

I see what your saying, but unRAID software will only use eth0. Other software can use the additional interface.

That is awfully generous of you Shawn and I just might take you up on it but let me try out the fortigate before I waste your time because if the fortigate works that is how I'll go because it will be free to me (or my boss will give it to me for next to nothing) since it has been sitting in a box at work for the past few years and will never be used again.

UnRAID only supports a single NIC.

 

unRAID only activates the first NIC it finds.  You can manually bring up secondary interfaces.

 

I see what your saying, but unRAID software will only use eth0. Other software can use the additional interface.

 

Nope not true.

 

Samba uses the following ports (source):

Port 135/TCP

Port 137/UDP

Port 138/UDP

Port 139/TCP

Port 445/TCP

 

If you take a look at the output of netstat

root@Nesoi:~# netstat -na
Active Internet connections (servers and established)
Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address           Foreign Address         State
tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:37              0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN
tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:873             0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN
[color=red][b]tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:139             0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN[/b][/color]
tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:111             0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN
[color=blue][b]tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:8080            0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN
tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:80              0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN[/b][/color]
tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:35860           0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN
[color=blue][b]tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:21              0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN
tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:23              0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN[/b][/color]
[color=red][b]tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:445             0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN[/b][/color]
tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:3551            0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN
tcp        0      0 192.168.1.51:445        192.168.1.52:52723      TIME_WAIT
tcp        0      0 192.168.1.51:445        192.168.1.52:52781      ESTABLISHED
tcp        0      0 192.168.1.51:445        192.168.1.52:52742      TIME_WAIT
tcp        0      0 192.168.1.51:23         192.168.1.100:63217     ESTABLISHED
udp        0      0 0.0.0.0:768             0.0.0.0:*
udp        0      0 192.168.1.51:137        0.0.0.0:*
udp        0      0 192.168.1.59:137        0.0.0.0:*
[color=red][b]udp        0      0 0.0.0.0:137             0.0.0.0:*[/b][/color]
udp        0      0 192.168.1.51:138        0.0.0.0:*
udp        0      0 192.168.1.59:138        0.0.0.0:*
[color=red][b]udp        0      0 0.0.0.0:138             0.0.0.0:*[/b][/color]
udp        0      0 0.0.0.0:37              0.0.0.0:*
udp        0      0 0.0.0.0:68              0.0.0.0:*
udp        0      0 0.0.0.0:111             0.0.0.0:*
udp        0      0 0.0.0.0:49136           0.0.0.0:*
udp        0      0 192.168.1.59:123        0.0.0.0:*
udp        0      0 192.168.1.51:123        0.0.0.0:*
udp        0      0 127.0.0.1:123           0.0.0.0:*
udp        0      0 0.0.0.0:123             0.0.0.0:*

 

Red = Samba ports.  They are bound to 0.0.0.0 meaning Samba binds to all interfaces.

Blue = emhttp, unMenu, telnet, and ftp.  Once again they are bound to 0.0.0.0

 

I brought up the secondary interface on my motherboard and after restarting the array was able to connect to the server via the secondary interface for all the services in blue.  To make this persistent, all I would have to do is add one line to the go script to bring up the secondary interface and another to restart the array and the everything would be available on both interfaces.

 

This is not germane to this thread and we need to stop thread-jacking.  If you want to to discuss further feel free to send me a PM or start a new thread

No problem. Be nice if the free, or next to, works out for you! Let me know how it goes.

 

Shawn

 

Progress but no magic bullet.  I installed Tomato firmware on my WRT54G Linksys box and have it bridging from the client to my airport but I still haven't been able to get access to the Fortigate units for various reasons.  As of now I'm manually swapping the cable between my Comcast connection and my wifi bridged connection when I go to bed and wake up. 

 

Not perfect, but at least keeping me from hitting my bandwidth limits.  Now I just need to get something working as a router so I don't have to manually switch cables all of the time.

Well at least you got "something" working now, on the cheap.   And you can take your time working out the routing issue...

 

Shawn