| 1 |
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:28:16 +0100 |
| 2 |
Stroller <stroller@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> On 24 Oct 2007, at 15:41, Daniel da Veiga wrote: |
| 6 |
> > ... |
| 7 |
> > Simple home APs act just like that, no address for configs or |
| 8 |
> > anything, just a bridge to another network. These devices have no |
| 9 |
> > config at all, they simply create an SSID with no encryption to a |
| 10 |
> > wired network. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I had a belkin AP that I think was like this. The windows-only control |
| 13 |
program (wasn't running wine at the time) was a big reason I will |
| 14 |
probaby never buy one again. Once you build a real router, you never |
| 15 |
go back... |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> > What he got is a WIRELESS ROUTER that acts like an Access Point, |
| 18 |
> > providing a gateway and forwarding, linked to another router... |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Where do you find this particular definition of an "access point"? |
| 21 |
> I would have believed the expression "wireless access point" to |
| 22 |
> include either class of device within its definition. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I agree. I think 'AP' has come to mean, perhaps a trifle informally, |
| 25 |
simply a device to allow wireless access to a wired network. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> I should add that there are some APish devices which bridge - i.e. |
| 28 |
> they do not route or NAT - yet still have a MAC address & IP for |
| 29 |
> administrative purposes. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Stroller. |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives