Ranting
2007-08-28
I've noticed that the last six posts have been big rants (or suggestions thereof), and I'd like to take this opportunity to do something about it.
Unfortunately I'm not in the mood: I'm having a bad day and I blame Cisco...
You see, we have a couple of Cisco routers left over from an old project: they were meant to be installed at customer premises because our VoIP infrastructure provider insisted on them, so when the deal fell through we got stuck with them.
In order to reduce the amount of NAT going on (what with a hardware firewall/router behind an ADSL modem/router) we're going to have a DMZ subnet. The ADSL box can route the subnet classically, the firewall can have one or more addresses for NAT (and stuff trying to get out of the network) and my pet project box can have a public address all to itself. In order to do that, we need a switch in the DMZ, which considering our already vile tower of kit is best done by swapping the ADSL router for one with a built-in switch.
And so comes my attempt to reuse the Cisco box. Bear in mind that I only want it for its ports: I have other routers that will do classical routing, and apparently with much less trouble.
The web interface is a Java applet. I've tried it on two different computers, with two versions of IE. One of them got far enough to order a factory reset ... just. Every other time the applet has spent ages processing a trivial form, or simply refused to accept button presses. When I managed to get as far as filling in the 'Quick Setup' form and submitting it I left it to process over lunch and it still hadn't finished when I got back. If by some incredible inefficiency it actually does take half an hour to update the flash config - something that clearly shouldn't be the case - you shouldn't call it quick.
The CLI I won't moan about too much. I still have great faith that as a Cisco device it would do its job marvellously. Extensive typos in the manual mean that I can't configure it on the command line though: a more cynical person might wonder whether the device is designed to require some manner of training, convenient considering Cisco sells its own certifications.
I've taken it out again. Tomorrow I'm going to put in the ST546 that I borrowed to test my home connection. It has an Ethernet switch, it explicitly supports a routed subnet, I know I can configure it and its huge 'default server' flaw won't affect it because I don't need NAT.
Then I'll see if they want to sell me the old one (a ST 510) for home: not having the switch will be a slight drawback but at least I know the NAT will be right.
Unfortunately I'm not in the mood: I'm having a bad day and I blame Cisco...
You see, we have a couple of Cisco routers left over from an old project: they were meant to be installed at customer premises because our VoIP infrastructure provider insisted on them, so when the deal fell through we got stuck with them.
In order to reduce the amount of NAT going on (what with a hardware firewall/router behind an ADSL modem/router) we're going to have a DMZ subnet. The ADSL box can route the subnet classically, the firewall can have one or more addresses for NAT (and stuff trying to get out of the network) and my pet project box can have a public address all to itself. In order to do that, we need a switch in the DMZ, which considering our already vile tower of kit is best done by swapping the ADSL router for one with a built-in switch.
And so comes my attempt to reuse the Cisco box. Bear in mind that I only want it for its ports: I have other routers that will do classical routing, and apparently with much less trouble.
The web interface is a Java applet. I've tried it on two different computers, with two versions of IE. One of them got far enough to order a factory reset ... just. Every other time the applet has spent ages processing a trivial form, or simply refused to accept button presses. When I managed to get as far as filling in the 'Quick Setup' form and submitting it I left it to process over lunch and it still hadn't finished when I got back. If by some incredible inefficiency it actually does take half an hour to update the flash config - something that clearly shouldn't be the case - you shouldn't call it quick.
The CLI I won't moan about too much. I still have great faith that as a Cisco device it would do its job marvellously. Extensive typos in the manual mean that I can't configure it on the command line though: a more cynical person might wonder whether the device is designed to require some manner of training, convenient considering Cisco sells its own certifications.
I've taken it out again. Tomorrow I'm going to put in the ST546 that I borrowed to test my home connection. It has an Ethernet switch, it explicitly supports a routed subnet, I know I can configure it and its huge 'default server' flaw won't affect it because I don't need NAT.
Then I'll see if they want to sell me the old one (a ST 510) for home: not having the switch will be a slight drawback but at least I know the NAT will be right.
Comments