[Cerowrt-devel] DLNA with wired and wireless devices

[Cerowrt-devel] DLNA with wired and wireless devices

[Justin Madru]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 422 bytes --]

Hi,

I have a wired DLNA server (minidlna) on the wired network, but require
wireless devices to have access to it. It seems that with the default setup
(the split of the wired and wireless into separate networks), devices on
the wireless network are not able to discover the DLNA server.

Is there a way to work around this? Or is the only solution to restore the
traditional 192.168.x.x single network setup?

-- Justin

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 512 bytes --]

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] DLNA with wired and wireless devices

[Maciej Soltysiak]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1217 bytes --]

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Justin Madru <justin.jdm64@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have a wired DLNA server (minidlna) on the wired network, but require
> wireless devices to have access to it. It seems that with the default setup
> (the split of the wired and wireless into separate networks), devices on
> the wireless network are not able to discover the DLNA server.
>
> Is there a way to work around this? Or is the only solution to restore the
> traditional 192.168.x.x single network setup?
>
Yes, you can bridge everything as openwrt does and it should work.

However it was possible for it to work over multiple interfaces using
miniupnpd and minissdpd to forward 239.255.255.250 UDP broadcasts from ge00
to sw00 and sw10 and back. However, last time it worked for me in cero
was 3.3.x.

I was unable to fix it recent with 3.7.x versions yet and having little
time to work on it I'm almost making no progress.

If you have the inclination I would encourage you to try tinkering with it
to help out.

Regards,
Maciej

>
>

>
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2269 bytes --]

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] DLNA with wired and wireless devices

[Maciej Soltysiak]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 917 bytes --]

Justin, please have a go with latest 3.7.2-4, I tested and it works for me
with devices on se00 and sw00 and sw10. It's not enabled for guest wlan:

http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~cero2/cerowrt/wndr/3.7.2-4/
Maciej
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Justin Madru <justin.jdm64@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have a wired DLNA server (minidlna) on the wired network, but require
> wireless devices to have access to it. It seems that with the default setup
> (the split of the wired and wireless into separate networks), devices on
> the wireless network are not able to discover the DLNA server.
>
> Is there a way to work around this? Or is the only solution to restore the
> traditional 192.168.x.x single network setup?
>
> -- Justin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1700 bytes --]

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] DLNA with wired and wireless devices

[Justin Madru]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1077 bytes --]

Awesome! It seems to be working now. Thanks!


On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Maciej Soltysiak <maciej@soltysiak.com>wrote:

> Justin, please have a go with latest 3.7.2-4, I tested and it works for me
> with devices on se00 and sw00 and sw10. It's not enabled for guest wlan:
>
> http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~cero2/cerowrt/wndr/3.7.2-4/
> Maciej
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Justin Madru <justin.jdm64@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a wired DLNA server (minidlna) on the wired network, but require
>> wireless devices to have access to it. It seems that with the default setup
>> (the split of the wired and wireless into separate networks), devices on
>> the wireless network are not able to discover the DLNA server.
>>
>> Is there a way to work around this? Or is the only solution to restore
>> the traditional 192.168.x.x single network setup?
>>
>> -- Justin
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>
>>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2299 bytes --]

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] DLNA with wired and wireless devices

[Dave Taht]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1106 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Justin Madru <justin.jdm64@gmail.com>wrote:

> Awesome! It seems to be working now. Thanks!
>

OK, so to me this means that routing in the home, rather than bridging, can
work even with upnp and dlna. Which makes me happy as I hope to one day be
able to explore the effect of bridging gigE and wireless in larger scale
networks. I have plenty of raw data showing how bad an idea it is, but
nothing comprehensive as yet.

A core question for me then becomes, how does upnp deal with multiple
routers in the home, if they aren't natted?

Another item is that upnp has the ability to advertise the available
bandwidth to clients, and I was thinking of storing the rate limiting for
ceroshaper in that rather that in a dedicated file. Does anything actually
use that information? What do common bittorrent clients do with upnp
nowadays? How about skype?

Are there any other common gateway applications that are going to break in
a routed environment?

-- 
Dave Täht

Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt:
http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1548 bytes --]

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] DLNA with wired and wireless devices

[dpreed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2274 bytes --]


A non-obvious gateway application that some people like is a "DMZ".  In other words, a portion of the home network (one computer), that handles traffic from the outside that one never wants to reach internal resources that are not in the DMZ.
 
Home routers often talk about how to setup a DMZ, so there ought to be a way to do so in a routed network.
 
Please don't react to this by assuming that I personally like the DMZ concept.  I would rather do something more subtle - provide a "honeypot" feature that attracts would-be scanners/attackers to a place where they can do no harm, and where information about them can be collected.  (the latter could be a great benefit to consumers who opt-in to it, whereas the DMZ "feature" is often misused by people to get around the problem of NAT getting in the way - sort of an anti-DMZ)
 
-----Original Message-----
From: "Dave Taht" <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 11:32am
To: "Justin Madru" <justin.jdm64@gmail.com>
Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] DLNA with wired and wireless devices





On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Justin Madru <[mailto:justin.jdm64@gmail.com] justin.jdm64@gmail.com> wrote:

Awesome! It seems to be working now. Thanks!
OK, so to me this means that routing in the home, rather than bridging, can work even with upnp and dlna. Which makes me happy as I hope to one day be able to explore the effect of bridging gigE and wireless in larger scale networks. I have plenty of raw data showing how bad an idea it is, but nothing comprehensive as yet.
A core question for me then becomes, how does upnp deal with multiple routers in the home, if they aren't natted?
Another item is that upnp has the ability to advertise the available bandwidth to clients, and I was thinking of storing the rate limiting for ceroshaper in that rather that in a dedicated file. Does anything actually use that information? What do common bittorrent clients do with upnp nowadays? How about skype?
Are there any other common gateway applications that are going to break in a routed environment?-- 
Dave Täht

Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: [http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html] http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3003 bytes --]

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] DLNA with wired and wireless devices

[Dave Taht]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4117 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:45 PM, <dpreed@reed.com> wrote:

> A non-obvious gateway application that some people like is a "DMZ".  In
> other words, a portion of the home network (one computer), that handles
> traffic from the outside that one never wants to reach internal resources
> that are not in the DMZ.
>

I had explicitly left open an ip range in cerowrt for a DMZ if needed.
(33-65)



>
>
> Home routers often talk about how to setup a DMZ, so there ought to be a
> way to do so in a routed network.
>
>
>
> Please don't react to this by assuming that I personally like the DMZ
> concept.  I would rather do something more subtle - provide a "honeypot"
> feature that attracts would-be scanners/attackers to a place where they can
> do no harm, and where information about them can be collected.  (the latter
> could be a great benefit to consumers who opt-in to it, whereas the DMZ
> "feature" is often misused by people to get around the problem of NAT
> getting in the way - sort of an anti-DMZ)
>

I like the honeypot idea a lot. I'd like very much to be participating in
detecting and thwarting a variety of attacks. I note that a huge number of
attacks now come from within the firewall as well.

My limited preliminary attempt at this was to protect cero slightly by
installing sensors on the telnet and ftp ports on the router, using
xinetd which disable several other services when probed (notably ssh -
except the one that I most want to disable, the web configuration server,
which can't run out of xinetd at present. Sigh).

Since doing that, discussed on this list have been several higher end and
more comprehensive tools but I haven't had time to pursue them (I'll gladly
take packages and patches)

I'd love to have something that tracked dns amplification attempts (and
thwarted/reported them). rbl support, too... Similarly a rate flooding
detector more robust than what openwrt currently does (and cerowrt doesn't)
would be nice (openwrt artificially rate limits icmp to 1000/sec which is
kind of large in the case of a home gateway and rather small in the case of
an ethernet)

and since this is a topic that the NSF was rather interested in, I thought
about applying for grants to try to address it (I have a draft of a
proposal if anyone wants to pursue it) in their recent solicitation round...

.... but me, I'd rather fix bufferbloat (and ipv6).

I DID build the thc ipv6 attack toolkit starting a few releases ago. The
situation there if you try that stuff out is pretty terrifying.


>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Dave Taht" <dave.taht@gmail.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 11:32am
> To: "Justin Madru" <justin.jdm64@gmail.com>
> Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] DLNA with wired and wireless devices
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Justin Madru <justin.jdm64@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Awesome! It seems to be working now. Thanks!
>>
> OK, so to me this means that routing in the home, rather than bridging,
> can work even with upnp and dlna. Which makes me happy as I hope to one day
> be able to explore the effect of bridging gigE and wireless in larger scale
> networks. I have plenty of raw data showing how bad an idea it is, but
> nothing comprehensive as yet.
> A core question for me then becomes, how does upnp deal with multiple
> routers in the home, if they aren't natted?
> Another item is that upnp has the ability to advertise the available
> bandwidth to clients, and I was thinking of storing the rate limiting for
> ceroshaper in that rather that in a dedicated file. Does anything actually
> use that information? What do common bittorrent clients do with upnp
> nowadays? How about skype?
> Are there any other common gateway applications that are going to break in
> a routed environment?
>  --
> Dave Täht
>
> Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt:
> http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html
>



-- 
Dave Täht

Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt:
http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5874 bytes --]