Looking for open-source home DSL gateway software & hardware to run it

OpenWRT is the more general one.

Sub-$100 means that you're going to be taking an off-the-shelf consumer device and retasking it with your own software.

OpenWRT and its descendants will get you Linux running on an off-the-shelf router for the chipsets they support. Many of those boxes ran linux as it was anyway.

Also, sub-$100 appliance form means that you have to make substantial cuts in hardware features, which means its not a PC any longer, which means you have to get specialized like OpenWRT.

TNX, that's new to me.

There's lots of varients of both. The Wikipedia entries for both have lots of pointers off to various projects associated or not-so-associated with them.

Please excuse my ignorance (as I'm router-challenged). How does a DSL router differ from a cable router or a just plain ol' router? I presume that there will be a network interface ("modem") of sorts, and that from there to the various computers there will be Ethernet. So how does a DSL router differ from an Ethernet router?

A DSL router should be the same as a cable router.

The difference from a traditional IP router is that NAT is the default, and maybe the only option. Also, most now have a built-in ethernet switch to allow more than one LAN port, rare for a traditional router.

An "ethernet" router should route more than one protocol. Besides IP there are DECnet and Appletalk (EtherTalk), and IPX that are commonly used. I don't know of any cable/DSL routers that do that with the included software.

-- glen

Thanks, Glen. It sounds, then, that "DSL router" and "cable router" and "broadband router" are all the same thing. It also sounds like that if Al Dykes wants such an appliance with low power usage (and quiet convection cooling), he should go with something much cheaper than $100 - such as this D-Link unit for $34 :

Be sure to find out if your present connection is using PPPoE or PPPoA as it's connection protocol so you can get the right router. Not all of them support both protocols and Telco's use which ever one came with the hardware they inherited during a buy-out or was purchased by management. I have seen neighborhoods in the same city use both protocols depending on which Telco router was the first device that the particular location contacted to feed them the DSL signal.

I should have said broadband router. That would cover cable and DSL service. The physical interface is the same, a UPT ethernet cable and PPPoE is on or off depending on the ISP in use.

"ethernet router" covers lots of ground and in corporate stuff wouldn't be expected to have PPPoE, NAT, DHCP, etc unless the buyer made sure it did and the services might be off, by default.

It sounds like an "Ethernet router" would be more basic, and the higher level protocols like IP and PPPoE and DHCP would ride on top of the Ethernet routing and would be supplied by computers that the router connects. Is that close?

From what I'm seeing, more and more DSL install use a combination modem and router with NAT enabled by default. You have to ask for bridged mode where it only functions as a modem and thus you get control over what happens to routing and log in.

Most cable installs these days seem to be just a plain modem where you get your IP via DHCP. At least the Time Warner and Comcast situations I've seen recently.

So many folks who talk about a DSL router can be considered somewhat correct. Just too terse for complete accuracy.

David

That's what I have - just a "modem" (or "bridge", as I've read in Usenet postings). That has been the case for MediaOne/ ATT/Comcast/TimeWarner here for 8 years. Obviously, I only have one PC. I just can't wait to get a 2nd PC so I can start playing LAN admin and haunting the router newsgroups. :-)

You could go with the Linksys WRT-54G V.4 or the WRT-54GL, both of which run Linux. Stay away from the WRT-54G V.5, which is stripped down (2Mb flash,

If you want more horsepower, and are willing to spend a bit more, look at the Soekris, PC Engines, or Microtik boards, or one of the mini/micro ITX systems.