From: "Antti Kurenniemi" 

"Ellen K."  wrote in message
news:4798p2dvir1pksni2k2gc3gsu3omsrc1np{at}4ax.com...
> First of all, thanks for the responses.    :)
>
> First:
> OK, I understand that I can have one router that will be like my current
> one for the desktops *and* wireless for the laptop.  This is good.  Does
> this automatically result in all the machines being able to be online at
> the same time if desired?

Yeppers. You'll end up having an internal network, just like at any office,
from which any computer can connect to internet via just one external line.


> Second:
> I still want to know about the security part.  I know about people
> freeloading on the network when it includes wireless, and that that
> can be prevented.

Exactemundo, that's the wireless protection part (key in the router + your
computer). Prevents anyone else from surfing your wlan, unless of course
they figure out your key (not likely) or crack the protection (also not
likely, as you're probably not that interesting as a target).


> But what I want to know is how to protect all the
> machines against viruses etc -- do I have to have a firewall and
> antivirus on each one?

Well it certainly doesn't hurt. I've got antivirus and a software firewall
on all my computers, but I could do without the software firewall - I
mainly keep it so that I know what software in my system is trying to
"phone home" and things like that. The built-in firewall in
Windows XP is enough if you have a router that does NAT. As for virus
scanners, well, I don't even remember when was the last time I've been
alerted about a virus, but I still would feel a wee bit uncomfortable
without one.

One thing you need to remember, though, is that with ADSL, you're *always*
connected to the internet (unless you unplug the cable or disable the
connection, but that's kinda daft), so you need to be a bit mindful about
what you do with your computers. Though, unless you have a secret identity
that tends to engage in promiscuous activities, I'd say you'll be just
fine.


> (What caught my eye in the article about the ZA
> one was that it appeared to be saying it would do everything.
> I was trying to ask if that is true.)

I'm a bit against the all-in-one devices+applications, because basically if
there is a stupid leak in one of the components, it's very possible that
the same piece of code / approach is used in the rest, and thus the whole
combination is a suspect. Think of it like having all locks in a building
being of the exact same model: once a thief learns to pick the first one,
the rest should be no more than a nuisance.

This is mostly a personal opinion, and probably in real life the ZA stuff
may well be excellent, so if it seems otherwise fit for your purposes &
affordable, go for it.


> Third:
> The printer I bought is not the networkable version.  Right now it is
> connected to one of the desktops and the other one uses it that way.

You can still use printer sharing, so if that works for you just stick to
it. Just remember that if you get software firewalls, you may need to
enable the printer (and file) sharing to make it work.


> You guys seem to be saying it could be an entity on the network
> by itself.  We do have the same model in my office and the way my
> office-mate and I share it is that it has an IP address... there is some
> extra little device that attaches to it... is that what you mean?

Yes and no. Some printers are networked, meaning there's a NIC inside
there, and you plug it in just like another computer. If the printer itself
doesn't have a network controller, you can get an external box that is a
"printer server". They're pretty cheap, but IME not always very
reliable. Also, there are routers that have a USB print server, for example
the Zyxel P-335WT :
http://www.zyxel.com/web/product_family_detail.php?PC1indexflag=20040520161313&
CategoryGroupNo=E0B07299-357C-47D7-8D7F-47644BBC8CBE . It has WLAN, 4
ethernet ports and USB printer server, so it's a pretty neat combination,
but I had one and it kept losing the printer every now and then. I'm not
sure if it was because of the printer or the router, but I bought a new
printer that had an internal network connection, and now everything's
running just beautifully.


> I think the extra device costs about $100...

Sounds about right, but could be less.


> If I leave it as is and get a combination router as you are
> suggesting, could I print from the laptop to it *without* the
> extra device, i.e. similarly to how the other desktop does it?

Yes. Just remember that if you use printer sharing, you'll have to have the
computer on at all times, to which the printer is connected to. Also, you
can start with just the router and if the printing is difficult that way,
you can always get the print server thingamajickie later.


Antti Kurenniemi

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5