Off-Topic: Travel Router And Firewall

Home » CentOS » Off-Topic: Travel Router And Firewall
CentOS 17 Comments

This is off-topic and the only connection with CentOS is that the laptop will be running CentOS…

I am looking for a travel router/firewall for a number of reasons:

– Protect against outside attacks when outside the office/home not relying on whatever protection the laptop/tablet/phone offers.

– Allow for fast transfer for data between devices without being limited by the bandwidth of the hotel etc., even without being connected to the internet.

– Allow for multiple devices even when the hotel etc. only allows one device to be registered.

The ideal device should:

– Be small, ideally be able to be charged via a USB port.

– Use open-source software that the user can update.

– Allow the user to log on the device and set up the connection with the hotel etc. which often requires a userid and password to be entered on a browser page.

– Allow using either a RJ-45 wired or wireless connection to the outside net.

– Have at least two RJ-45 ports to connect a laptop avoiding WiFi.

– Allow for VPN tunneling.

If anyone has suggestions, they would be greatly appreciated!

17 thoughts on - Off-Topic: Travel Router And Firewall

  • Go to the openwrt site and see what replaced the TP-Link TL_WRN702N. The new one has 2 ether ports and can be USB powered.

    Of course, there are those who will say you should use a raspberry pi for that…

  • a raspberry pi has only one 100baseT ethernet port, and 11N wireless
    (about 50Mbps effective max throughput on wifi).

  • the APU2, which is their current generation board suitable for a router like this, requires 12VDC up to 1 amp, so tis not suitable for USB power
    (5V, up to 2.5 amp) unless you rig up a USB to 12V DC-DC converter.

    I do wonder how the OP plans on connecting his phone and/or tablet via ethernet to this. if the hotel internet is wifi, and he wants his own private wifi for said phone/tablet, the router would need TWO wifi adapters.

  • I think you mean 2.5 *watts* not amps. USB 2.0 and below are 500 mA @ 5 Vdc max == 2.5W. There are nonstandard extensions to USB to allow 2+ amps, but you can’t expect to get that from generic USB ports.

    USB 3 Type C fixes this, but I don’t think that helps the OP.

    Increasing the voltage decreases the current. TANSTAAFL.

    With typical conversion losses, you could only expect to get about 170 mA out of USB when boosted to 12V.

    Incidentally, the Raspberry Pi is only USB-powered in the sense that the base board will usually run fine from a PC USB port. Add a couple of wifi radios and an Ethernet adapter, and you may exceed the 500 mA limit. The Pi is also famously intolerant of power rail sags and such.

    It’s best to think of the Pi as a device that just happens to have a micro USB power connector on it, but which is still wall-powered.

    It can be done:

    http://www.gottabemobile.com/2014/08/28/how-to-connect-an-ipad-to-ethernet/

    I assume there are equivalent methods on Android.

    Yes, that’s a much simpler option, inherent in a proper travel router, another reason to avoid hacking something up with a Pi. The problem’s already been solved, and solved well.

  • USB 2 battery charging extensions 1.2, from 2010, allow as much as 5
    amps in charge mode, and 1.5 amps while communicating over the USB.

    Yes, the port (or power adapter) has to be built to allow this much power, and the device has to verify the port can provide it before it can suck it down. my 5+ year old laptop has one such ‘charging’ port, the other ports are limited to 0.5amp. you have to enable the charging port in the BIOS, and it can be configured to stay live when the laptop is sleeping as long as the laptop is plugged in and not running on the laptop’s internal battery.

    http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/devclass_docs/BCv1.2_070312.zip

    —
    john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz

  • Am 24.11.2016 um 00:15 schrieb Warren Young :

    I have such a setup here with an iPadAir. Normal network use works but “facetime”
    seems to be hardwired to WIFI. It complains not having a connection. So, not 100%
    functional.

  • You are right, I had forgotten about needing two WiFi adapters… If there is an Ethernet jack in the hotel room I would go with that but that is, of course, far from assured and two WiFi nets would be needed.

  • I did visit both the OpenWRT lists and the TP-Link website. On the latter, I found four travel routers: WR810N 300 Mbps, powered from an outlet and 2 RJ-45 ports, its predecessor WR710N 150 Mbps, WR802N 300 Mbps and powered via micro-USB port and 1 RJ-45 port, and finally WR702N 150 Mbps. If I read correctly, only the 8xx models have at least 8 Mb of flash memory required for OpenWRT so it’s down to either WR810N or WR802N. Of note is that all routers are apparently sold in a US version where the firmware is locked and a European version where it is not, the latter easier to flash.

    OpenWRT seems like a good solution. However, I am not an expert on this and two questions remain:

    – Will OpenWRT allow me to using a computer, tablet or phone configure the access when the hotel (or similar) uses a web page where one has to enter userid and password?

    – When the router is connected to the WAN using an Ethernet cable, am I correct that it is used in AP (Access Point) mode? And when the router is connected to the WAN using WiFi and the user devices access the router it is used in Bridge mode?

    Thank you for all the suggestions and comments so far!

  • I have prototyped a similar setup with RasPi. With a 4GB (or higher)
    SD card, flash storage is not a limiting factor compared routers like TP-Link.

    I did try openWRT on Raspi but the driver (Realtek 8192 IIRC) for my USB LAN was not stable.

    Settled on Raspbian (all config files hand edited). There is Pidora
    (Fedora spin) also.

    I suggest NAT on the openWRT device’s “WAN” interface and within it do the “captive portal” auth with the “host” network. Your devices connected on the “LAN” (wired + WiFi) should route through the openWRT device.

    Yes, you can make the WiFi interface act as an AP when the LAN
    interface is the “WAN” IIRC, in openWRT bridge mode of the “WAN”
    interface is possible. But then all devices on the “LAN” side will be visible to the “host” network.

    openWRT does have good documentation with practical use case setups.

    HTH,
    — Arun Khan

  • I have found Ethernet RJ45 ports in hotel rooms with wi-fi frequently no longer active and simply relics of an earlier Internet service.

  • I understand, that’s why the ability to connect to the WAN using either RJ-45 – preferred – or wirelessly is important.

  • I use kit from this company at every opportunity. Great value, powerful capabilities, you can use their web ui but they also have a very comprehensive command line interface. Sometimes it takes a bit of trial and error to get the correct combo of commands to do what is needed –
    there are lots of recipes on their various wikis and support web sites.