* * * Cross Posted * * *

comp.os.linux.networking, alt.comp.networking.routers,
alt.comp.networking.connectivity

Greetings to all:

History & Current conditions:

Recently our daughter had her own SOHO Linksys WCG200 Wireless Cable
Gateway retired, in favor of the cable provider's Motorola Cable
Modem/Router/Telephone Modem unit. She hasn't missed loosing her
wireless capability, as she seldom ever used her own laptops with it and
the laptops are all but retired. However, she's very frequently on the
Internet with her desktop system. I have inherited the retired Linksys
WCG200 Cable Gateway.

In my home, I have an older model Linksys BEFCMU10 Version 2 Cable Modem
and a recent model Linksys WRT310N Wireless Router, where I have only
the slightest need for the wireless capability for occasional
maintenance of our youngest son's laptop when he's in the geographic
area. However, I support multiple desktop systems (Linux and one part
time Windows XP Pro system) with my recent model Linksys WRT310N Router.

Query: Could I marginally benefit from retiring my older Linksys
BEFCMU10 Cable modem, and replacing it with my daughter's now retired
older model Linksys WCG200 Cable Gateway such that I would have a
cascaded topology of two UPS protected routers?

Current: ISP <--> BEFCMU10 <--> WRT310N <--> Linux/Windows systems

Proposed: ISP <--> WCG200 <--> WRT310N <--> Linux/Windows systems

Rational: 1.) Recent Trojan malware attacks, aimed at routers with poor
password protection. 2.) Enjoy further networking isolation such that a
second and different range of class C IP addresses could possibly
protect against /some/ future intrusion attempts.

I can cope with the extra layer of complexity, if the benefit is some
extra Internet safety. Isn't this what large, centrally located
organizations do? Even if the benefits are only minimal.

Thank you in advance.

Pete

--
1PW

@?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t]