I am thinking of going with a VOIP service to use as an extra line,
for cheaper phone calls. This is primarily for when my sister calls
friends in the UK for longer periods, tying up the regular phone line.
There are two possible ways to do this: Get an ATA, give it an IP
address on the LAN (using a public address). Or, I could get a router
with VOIP capability, and it can use the IP of the router to make the
calls. Also, I have seen some routers give automatic prioritisation
to VOIP calls, whereas if it was on the LAN side, I would have to
manually set this up through the firebrick.
Any suggestions? Am I better off sticking with BT 6p a minute option
for evening calls that last for a lengthy period?
Thanks.
Andrew.
--
Andrew Hodgson in Bromyard, Herefordshire, UK.
My Email: use <andrew at hodgsonfamily dot org>.
> Parden me but I would think you would be much better using a modem or
> a router I cannot see any connectors or anything on our firebricks all
> I can see on ours are scorch marks from the flames of the fire !! .
> Never heard of firebricks being used in connection with the internet
> or computers in general they usually found around fireplaces .
"Andrew Hodgson" <me3@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:tb0eg15rq06mh20gk9lubo6gfguelcplqu@4ax.com
> Hi all,
>
> I am thinking of going with a VOIP service to use as an
> extra line, for cheaper phone calls. This is primarily
> for when my sister calls friends in the UK for longer
> periods, tying up the regular phone line.
>
> There are two possible ways to do this: Get an ATA, give
> it an IP address on the LAN (using a public address).
> Or, I could get a router with VOIP capability, and it can
> use the IP of the router to make the calls. Also, I have
> seen some routers give automatic prioritisation to VOIP
> calls, whereas if it was on the LAN side, I would have to
> manually set this up through the firebrick.
>
> Any suggestions? Am I better off sticking with BT 6p a
> minute option for evening calls that last for a lengthy
> period?
>
> Thanks.
> Andrew.
If you're looking for a recommendation for a specific unit, the only one I
have personal experience of is the AVM Fritz!Box Fon which is an "all in
one" box containing an ADSL modem, an ATA (single Ethernet port so you'd
need a switch or hub to connect multiple computers, although it does also
have a USB port) and two analogue phone ports.
Each of the phone ports can be configured separately with different
accounts from the same or different providers and each of the two phones
connected can be made to ring for calls on either or both numbers. You can
ring between them as well as a sort of mini-PBX.
There is also a PSTN phone port which can be connected to either an
ordinary analogue BT line (the phone port of the ADSL splitter) or an ISDN
line. This will provide fallback if the VoIP system isn't working for some
reason, or you can use it to set up dialling rules so that calls to
mobiles or 0870 numbers go via BT, as a lot of VoIP providers charge more
than BT for calls to these numbers.
It does have QoS to give priority to VoIP calls as well, which needs no
setting up.
More info at www.avm.de/en if you want to have a look
Ivor
PS to Dex and Stefan no I don't have any connection with the company, even
though they are German..!
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:3mokcmF17rhhbU1@individual.net...
>
>
> "Andrew Hodgson" <me3@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:tb0eg15rq06mh20gk9lubo6gfguelcplqu@4ax.com
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am thinking of going with a VOIP service to use as an
>> extra line, for cheaper phone calls. This is primarily
>> for when my sister calls friends in the UK for longer
>> periods, tying up the regular phone line.
>>
>> There are two possible ways to do this: Get an ATA, give
>> it an IP address on the LAN (using a public address).
>> Or, I could get a router with VOIP capability, and it can
>> use the IP of the router to make the calls. Also, I have
>> seen some routers give automatic prioritisation to VOIP
>> calls, whereas if it was on the LAN side, I would have to
>> manually set this up through the firebrick.
>>
>> Any suggestions? Am I better off sticking with BT 6p a
>> minute option for evening calls that last for a lengthy
>> period?
>>
>> Thanks.
>> Andrew.
>
> If you're looking for a recommendation for a specific unit, the only one I
> have personal experience of is the AVM Fritz!Box Fon which is an "all in
> one" box containing an ADSL modem, an ATA (single Ethernet port so you'd
> need a switch or hub to connect multiple computers, although it does also
> have a USB port) and two analogue phone ports.
>
> Each of the phone ports can be configured separately with different
> accounts from the same or different providers and each of the two phones
> connected can be made to ring for calls on either or both numbers. You can
> ring between them as well as a sort of mini-PBX.
>
> There is also a PSTN phone port which can be connected to either an
> ordinary analogue BT line (the phone port of the ADSL splitter) or an ISDN
> line. This will provide fallback if the VoIP system isn't working for some
> reason, or you can use it to set up dialling rules so that calls to
> mobiles or 0870 numbers go via BT, as a lot of VoIP providers charge more
> than BT for calls to these numbers.
>
> It does have QoS to give priority to VoIP calls as well, which needs no
> setting up.
>
> More info at www.avm.de/en if you want to have a look
>
> Ivor
>
> PS to Dex and Stefan no I don't have any connection with the company, even
> though they are German..!
>
>
i wasnt even going to make that suggestion ivor lovey
<Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ql7eg154jmqpckqe54s3oohjpib5b7a725@4ax.com
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 13:01:21 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
[snip]
> > PS to Dex and Stefan no I don't have any connection
> > with the company, even though they are German..!
> Well you do go on about this "AVM Fritz!Box Fon" also
> Ivor so we can put it down to just another of your
> obsessions then Ivor .
If by "going on" about it you mean recommending it, then you're right, I
do, I think it's a great piece of kit. Obsession..? I wouldn't go that
far.
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:3momtdF17t20rU1@individual.net...
>
>
> <Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:ql7eg154jmqpckqe54s3oohjpib5b7a725@4ax.com
>> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 13:01:21 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
>> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> > PS to Dex and Stefan no I don't have any connection
>> > with the company, even though they are German..!
>
>> Well you do go on about this "AVM Fritz!Box Fon" also
>> Ivor so we can put it down to just another of your
>> obsessions then Ivor .
>
> If by "going on" about it you mean recommending it, then you're right, I
> do, I think it's a great piece of kit. Obsession..? I wouldn't go that
> far.
>
> Ivor
>
>
Sean wrote:
> Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
>
>
>> Parden me but I would think you would be much better using a modem or
>> a router I cannot see any connectors or anything on our firebricks all
>> I can see on ours are scorch marks from the flames of the fire !! .
>> Never heard of firebricks being used in connection with the internet
>> or computers in general they usually found around fireplaces .
>
>
> Think he means firewall :)
> Hi all,
>
> I am thinking of going with a VOIP service to use as an extra line,
> for cheaper phone calls. This is primarily for when my sister calls
> friends in the UK for longer periods, tying up the regular phone line.
Having an extra phone line cannot be a bad move. Don't forget it can
also have its own incoming number which family members can give out to
their friends.
How much cheaper outgoing calls will be is dependent on the VOIP service
chosen. Posts in this newsgroup or a Google search will allow you to
compare different offerings from various UK providers.
> There are two possible ways to do this: Get an ATA, give it an IP
> address on the LAN (using a public address). Or, I could get a router
> with VOIP capability, and it can use the IP of the router to make the
> calls. Also, I have seen some routers give automatic prioritisation
> to VOIP calls, whereas if it was on the LAN side, I would have to
> manually set this up through the firebrick.
A third way: software plus microphone and headphones.
If you already have a router I think I would go for an ATA plus a cheap
cordless phone. Having no experience of routers with Voip ports
someone else will have to advise you on whether these have any distinct
advantages over my suggestion. In particular, I do wonder how effective
the QoS capabilities are.
> Any suggestions? Am I better off sticking with BT 6p a minute option
> for evening calls that last for a lengthy period?
Estimate the capital cost of equipment, the price of UK VOIP calls and
how much is saved on renting another BT line. Factor in the importance
and convenience of a second phone line to your family.
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 14:13:57 +0000 (UTC), Brian <bandj@o2.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>A third way: software plus microphone and headphones.
>
> Yuck !!! .
Maybe, but for someone investigating VOIP it is a relatively inexpensive
way of starting out,
>>If you already have a router I think I would go for an ATA plus a cheap
>>cordless phone.
>
> Now you are talking but change the cheap for good quality I don't say
> this with particular reference to VOIP most cheap cordless are crap
> you need to be paying 30 or so pounds to get anything decent .
30 GBP could be someone's concept of 'cheap'. On the other hand the
Binatone I bought at Argus for 18 GBP works well for me and has clear
audio.
>>Estimate the capital cost of equipment, the price of UK VOIP calls and
>>how much is saved on renting another BT line. Factor in the importance
>>and convenience of a second phone line to your family.
>
> If cable Internet is an option no fixed phone lines are necessary at
> all .
Not being familiar with cable services do I take it that a second
telephone line is provided at no cost?
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 15:10:46 +0000 (UTC), Brian <bandj@o2.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>Not being familiar with cable services do I take it that a second
>>telephone line is provided at no cost?
>
> Has I stated Brian with VOIP you just do not need a FIXED phone line
> at all .
Yes, I understand that but I originally pointed out that one of the
considerations when taking the VOIP route is not having to acquire
another line. Now I did mention BT but could have written 'BT/cable'.
In either case the cost saving has to be balanced against expenditure on
other items.
<Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:mjbeg1993tufr1mg0ffdj06ql55n5chguk@4ax.com
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 13:44:27 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> > If by "going on" about it you mean recommending it,
> > then you're right, I do, I think it's a great piece of
> > kit. Obsession..? I wouldn't go that far.
>
> Personally I think it is a horrible looking thing now the
> Sipura 2000 is a different thing altogether a great
> looking object mind you I have always liked things that
> are straight and square . I am not all that pleased with
> the Linksys routers due to the slightly curved apperance
> they have when you look at them from the front :)) .
Well I agree with you to a certain extent but at the end of the day it's
how it works that is the important thing, isn't it.
>
>If you're looking for a recommendation for a specific unit, the only one I
>have personal experience of is the AVM Fritz!Box Fon which is an "all in
>one" box containing an ADSL modem, an ATA (single Ethernet port so you'd
>need a switch or hub to connect multiple computers, although it does also
>have a USB port) and two analogue phone ports.
>
>Each of the phone ports can be configured separately with different
>accounts from the same or different providers and each of the two phones
>connected can be made to ring for calls on either or both numbers. You can
>ring between them as well as a sort of mini-PBX.
>
>There is also a PSTN phone port which can be connected to either an
>ordinary analogue BT line (the phone port of the ADSL splitter) or an ISDN
>line. This will provide fallback if the VoIP system isn't working for some
>reason, or you can use it to set up dialling rules so that calls to
>mobiles or 0870 numbers go via BT, as a lot of VoIP providers charge more
>than BT for calls to these numbers.
>
>It does have QoS to give priority to VoIP calls as well, which needs no
>setting up.
>
>More info at www.avm.de/en if you want to have a look
>
Personally, I think you cannot go wrong with the Speedtouch 716 WL
It is a modem / router/ wireless with 2 VOIP ports - so you just plug
in an ordinary phone put in the name of your VOIP provider and your
username and password and you are away. It also has QOS of required.
"Me" <me@me.me> wrote in message
news:oimeg19o868k7i3p42ku38s47c820nk7p8@4ax.com
[snip]
> Personally, I think you cannot go wrong with the
> Speedtouch 716 WL
>
> http://www.speedtouch.co.uk/prod716WL.asp?menuCurrPos=2.
>
> It is a modem / router/ wireless with 2 VOIP ports - so
> you just plug in an ordinary phone put in the name of
> your VOIP provider and your username and password and you
> are away. It also has QOS of required.
>
> It costs around £90
Doesn't look too bad at all. Don't need (or like/want) wireless though, do
they do a non-wireless version..?
"adamc" <adamc@linuxmail.org> wrote in message
news:de7o5k$hjp$3@slavica.ukpost.com
[snip]
> I know very little about ATA or routers, but I kind of
> like my devices to normally do one thing - that way, when
> it goes wrong, you only lose that one service. By
> bundling up more services in one box, you increase your
> chance of losing more services. Just my 2p.
With most things I'd agree with you, but in this particular instance each
device is hard enough to get working on its own, never mind trying to get
three boxes all doing different things and probably from different
manufacturers, all to co-exist..! With a combined modem/router/ATA there
is only one box to configure and less physically *to* go wrong..!
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 15:53:39 +0000 (UTC), Brian <bandj@o2.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>Yes, I understand that but I originally pointed out that one of the
>>considerations when taking the VOIP route is not having to acquire
>>another line.
>
> But acquiring another line( VOIP ) is a requirement to getting huge
> savings compared to sticking with a BT or TW line and paying line
> rentals on same .For people who are not in a cabled area then the
> savings are not so great but there are still some cost savings to be
> had by going VOIP .One can always reduce BT line rental by having
> your BT line taken over by Talk Talk a reduction of about 50 p a month
> or ITPLC which offers a saving of around 2.00 a month compared with
> BT's line rental charges .
The OP may very well want to these points into account when making his
mind up on how to get a second phone line.
>> Now I did mention BT but could have written 'BT/cable'.
>>In either case the cost saving has to be balanced against expenditure on
>>other items.
>
> The savings from VOIP have got to be considered over the long term not
> the short a decent ATA will cost around 80.00 an all Geo calls package
> will cost anything from a fiver a month to 10.00 a month.
> I am not particularly bothered about call cost but my two vonage lines
> are costing just under 20.00 a month but for that I have the piece of
> mind knowing I can make calls to any UK or Irish Geo number without
> having to count the cost of each call or checking any web site to
> check how much credit I have left .
Using your figures (80 + 3x60) that is about 85 GBP per year over three
years. 85 GBP will buy a lot of UK geographical calls from 18866 at
their present rate. At an average of five calls per day we are looking
at a cost of about 36 GBP per year.
"adamc" <adamc@linuxmail.org> wrote in message
news:de82n4$jfe$3@slavica.ukpost.com
[snip]
> When everything is bundled into one box, diagnosis is
> easier - you just know it's the box and you either try
> and repair it or throw it out and
> buy a new one.
>
> However, I prefer the challenge of tracking a fault down,
> over several days, or even weeks, to a particular device,
> through trial and error ("well, x works, but y doesn't so
> it must be device z). Kind of masochistic, but I learn
> out of it. ;-)
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:46:54 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>"Me" <me@me.me> wrote in message
>news:oimeg19o868k7i3p42ku38s47c820nk7p8@4ax.com
>
>[snip]
>
>> Personally, I think you cannot go wrong with the
>> Speedtouch 716 WL
>>
>> http://www.speedtouch.co.uk/prod716WL.asp?menuCurrPos=2.
>>
>> It is a modem / router/ wireless with 2 VOIP ports - so
>> you just plug in an ordinary phone put in the name of
>> your VOIP provider and your username and password and you
>> are away. It also has QOS of required.
>>
>> It costs around £90
>
>Doesn't look too bad at all. Don't need (or like/want) wireless though, do
>they do a non-wireless version..?
Not at the moment although I think a 716 (without the WL) might be
available at some point.
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:46:54 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>"Me" <me@me.me> wrote in message
>news:oimeg19o868k7i3p42ku38s47c820nk7p8@4ax.com
>
>[snip]
>
>> Personally, I think you cannot go wrong with the
>> Speedtouch 716 WL
>>
>> http://www.speedtouch.co.uk/prod716WL.asp?menuCurrPos=2.
>>
>> It is a modem / router/ wireless with 2 VOIP ports - so
>> you just plug in an ordinary phone put in the name of
>> your VOIP provider and your username and password and you
>> are away. It also has QOS of required.
>>
>> It costs around £90
>
>Doesn't look too bad at all. Don't need (or like/want) wireless though, do
>they do a non-wireless version..?
"Me" <me@me.me> wrote in message
news:0a9fg1lu08rmanaqp5198g3bm44gb2c2bq@4ax.com
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:46:54 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
[snip]
> > Doesn't look too bad at all. Don't need (or like/want)
> > wireless though, do they do a non-wireless version..?
>
>
> Looks like the 716v5 is what you want
>
> http://www.speedtouchdsl.com/prod716.htm
>
> Me
Ok, looks good. On balance though I still prefer the Fritz!Box Fon, it has
the ability to connect to an ISDN line as well as (or rather instead of)
an analogue PSTN line. I don't have ISDN, but I can see occasions when it
might be useful. It also has the ability to hold the configurations of up
to 10 SIP accounts, all of which can be used for incoming calls, although
the selection of which one you want for an outgoing call if you have more
than 2 is a little awkward, requiring keycodes.
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:10:12 +0000 (UTC), adamc <adamc@linuxmail.org>
wrote:
>On 2005-08-20, Andrew Hodgson <me3@privacy.net> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am thinking of going with a VOIP service to use as an extra line,
>> for cheaper phone calls. This is primarily for when my sister calls
>> friends in the UK for longer periods, tying up the regular phone line.
>>
>> There are two possible ways to do this: Get an ATA, give it an IP
>> address on the LAN (using a public address). Or, I could get a router
>> with VOIP capability, and it can use the IP of the router to make the
>> calls. Also, I have seen some routers give automatic prioritisation
>> to VOIP calls, whereas if it was on the LAN side, I would have to
>> manually set this up through the firebrick.
>>
>> Any suggestions? Am I better off sticking with BT 6p a minute option
>> for evening calls that last for a lengthy period?
>>
>> Thanks.
>> Andrew.
>
>
>I know very little about ATA or routers, but I kind of like my devices
>to normally do one thing - that way, when it goes wrong, you only lose
>that one service. By bundling up more services in one box, you increase
>your chance of losing more services. Just my 2p.
Good point, which is why we don't have wireless on the router. My
basic issue of having a separate ATA is the QOS issue plus using one
of the LAN side IP addresses, whereas the router address isn't really
used for much. I could put the ATA on a private IP, and get it out
via another IP, using NAT, except I read somewhere that you get more
compatability with using no NAT! I was hoping I could start out using
a cheap router (software really isn't an option as we would have to
invest in microphone/headphones etc), and use an existing chordless
phone on it.
The advantage of using an ATA is I can configure things manually,
including the traffic shaping on the firewall. However, it would be
more expensive, as I would have to invest in a feature for the
firewall to provide this feature.
Thanks.
Andrew.
--
Andrew Hodgson in Bromyard, Herefordshire, UK.
My Email: use <andrew at hodgsonfamily dot org>.
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 14:13:57 +0000 (UTC), Brian <bandj@o2.co.uk>
wrote:
>On 20.08.2005, Andrew Hodgson wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am thinking of going with a VOIP service to use as an extra line,
>> for cheaper phone calls. This is primarily for when my sister calls
>> friends in the UK for longer periods, tying up the regular phone line.
>
>Having an extra phone line cannot be a bad move. Don't forget it can
>also have its own incoming number which family members can give out to
>their friends.
Yes although i really wanted it for use with outgoing calls.
Specificly that they don't tie up our main analog line.
>
>How much cheaper outgoing calls will be is dependent on the VOIP service
>chosen. Posts in this newsgroup or a Google search will allow you to
>compare different offerings from various UK providers.
Thanks.
>
>> There are two possible ways to do this: Get an ATA, give it an IP
>> address on the LAN (using a public address). Or, I could get a router
>> with VOIP capability, and it can use the IP of the router to make the
>> calls. Also, I have seen some routers give automatic prioritisation
>> to VOIP calls, whereas if it was on the LAN side, I would have to
>> manually set this up through the firebrick.
>
>A third way: software plus microphone and headphones.
Not really an option due to having to buy in headphones/microphones.
Plus we are also tied to the machine, whereas we have a chordless
phone already which is sitting doing sweet fa at the moment.
>
>If you already have a router I think I would go for an ATA plus a cheap
>cordless phone. Having no experience of routers with Voip ports
>someone else will have to advise you on whether these have any distinct
>advantages over my suggestion. In particular, I do wonder how effective
>the QoS capabilities are.
Thanks.
>
>> Any suggestions? Am I better off sticking with BT 6p a minute option
>> for evening calls that last for a lengthy period?
>
>Estimate the capital cost of equipment, the price of UK VOIP calls and
>how much is saved on renting another BT line. Factor in the importance
>and convenience of a second phone line to your family.
I had already done this. The main benefits are for when my sister
stays on the phone for long periods, basically talking about not very
much, but keeping the line busy for people who urgently need to ring
us (as my father deals with pastoral issues, it isn't great to get
call waiting all the time). The chordless phone we already have, and
I am looking at a new router anyway due to some issues with my current
model anyway.
Thanks.
Andrew.
--
Andrew Hodgson in Bromyard, Herefordshire, UK.
My Email: use <andrew at hodgsonfamily dot org>.
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 22:49:36 +0100, Me<me@me.me> wrote:
>On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:46:54 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
><ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"Me" <me@me.me> wrote in message
>>news:oimeg19o868k7i3p42ku38s47c820nk7p8@4ax.co m
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>> Personally, I think you cannot go wrong with the
>>> Speedtouch 716 WL
>>>
>>> http://www.speedtouch.co.uk/prod716WL.asp?menuCurrPos=2.
>>>
>>> It is a modem / router/ wireless with 2 VOIP ports - so
>>> you just plug in an ordinary phone put in the name of
>>> your VOIP provider and your username and password and you
>>> are away. It also has QOS of required.
>>>
>>> It costs around £90
>>
>>Doesn't look too bad at all. Don't need (or like/want) wireless though, do
>>they do a non-wireless version..?
>
>
>Looks like the 716v5 is what you want
>
>http://www.speedtouchdsl.com/prod716.htm
Thanks I will take a look. I don't wish to have wireless either. On
some review sites I have seen that most of the options on these boxes,
are done using cli, is this still the same?
Thanks.
Andrew.
--
Andrew Hodgson in Bromyard, Herefordshire, UK.
My Email: use <andrew at hodgsonfamily dot org>.
"Andrew Hodgson" <me3@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:todfg1h1cttg1kj0blpq6j7pun284q738j@4ax.com
[snip]
> Thanks I will take a look. I don't wish to have wireless
> either. On some review sites I have seen that most of
> the options on these boxes, are done using cli, is this
> still the same?
Could you explain what you mean by this, Andrew..? Configuration on mine
is the same as on a router, via a web interface.
"Al" <e@aa.invalid> wrote in message
news:ed8gg19vfd3fd1l39m6siptu4l2a7r28ss@4ax.com
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 18:36:10 +0100, Ivor Jones wrote:
>
> > With most things I'd agree with you, but in this
> > particular instance each device is hard enough to get
> > working on its own, never mind trying to get three
> > boxes all doing different things and probably from
> > different manufacturers, all to co-exist..! With a
> > combined modem/router/ATA there is only one box to
> > configure and less physically *to* go wrong..!
>
> The problem with this solution is that it doesn 't apply
> to those of us on cable. I agree that a combined
> router/ATA/switch (but NO adsl modem) is a good idea as
> it avoids that mass of power supplies looking for a free
> socket.
A couple of people I know on cable have the Netgear TA612V and they tell
me it works well. Its only problem is that the ones from Sipgate are
locked to them, but I'm told it's possible to unlock them.
>>
>>Looks like the 716v5 is what you want
>>
>>http://www.speedtouchdsl.com/prod716.htm
>
>Thanks I will take a look. I don't wish to have wireless either. On
>some review sites I have seen that most of the options on these boxes,
>are done using cli, is this still the same?
To be honest, I have not even gone into the CLI on this router! I have
done all that I need via the web interface.
<Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:hosgg1tqfbvq8j6thpg4ofbrq0tf0e4s8m@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 12:43:18 +0100, Dusty <me@here.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 12:08:38 GMT, Stefan wrote:
>>
>>
>>>i wasnt even going to make that suggestion ivor lovey
>>
>>pillock
> Takes on to know one mate .
Routers as opposed to ATAs 
Linear Mode
