Skip to main content

DLink (Direct Link to Satan)

Ugh been trying to get the VPN Working through the firewalls this afternoon again. Liquid pain. DLink surely stands for Direct link to Satan.

I find it unbelievable how many interfaces DLink seem to have been through with their products. It's insane. Surely a company like this would have one central office creating the interfaces. IT'S SUCH AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE PRODUCT.

They are kind enough to give you a taster of their interface hell by offering a massive variety of simulators on their support page. Brilliant.


Anyway I leave you with this as a final thought for the day..

Comments

Willie Aames said…
I have done it on pf sense via an x64 build and I got full speed. Largest problem when I tried it on ddwrt was the hardware cut me off around 6meg on pure. Also remember to reduce tbe MTU settings by 8bits from 1500 so you don't have lag/connection issues, this was the most important tweek for myself.
20 October 2015 at 15:03
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Creating star ratings in HTML and Javascript

I'd searched around a little for some shortcuts to help in doing this but I couldn't find anything satisfactory that included the ability to pull the rating off again for saving. I'd ended up coming up with this rather cheeky solution. Hopefully it helps you too! This is my first post in a while (I stopped blogging properly about 8 years ago!) It's strange coming back to it. Blogger feels very crusty and old by todays standards too.
Post a Comment
Read more

Make your objects immutable by default

More about the Good Dojo In my post last week , I discussed creating objects that are instantiated safely. Please go back and read if you are interested. At the end of the post, I mentioned that I'd also written the class so it was immutable when instantiated. This is important!!! I feel like a broken record in repeating this but I am sure at the time of writing your code, you aren't modifying your object all over the place and so are safe in the belief that protecting against mutability is overkill. Please remember though, your code could be around for a hell of a long time. You aren't writing your code for now... you are writing for the next fool that comes along (including you) . Nothing is more upsetting that coming back to fix a bug on some wonderfully crafted code to say "Who has butchered my code?!", but often you were involved at the start of the process. You made the code easy to modify, allowing objects to be used / reused / modified without thi
Post a Comment
Read more

An instantiated object should be "ok"

I've been QA'ing quite a bit of work recently and one common theme I've noticed across both Java and C# projects I have been looking at is that we occasionally open ourselves up unessacarily to Exceptions by the way objects are being created. My general rule of thumb (which I have seen mentioned in a Pluralsight video recently but also always re-iterate in various Robust Software talks I have done) is that you shouldn't be able to create an object and then call a method or access a property that then throws an exception. At worst, it should return null (I'm not going to moan about that now). I've created an example below. We have two Dojos, one is good and one is bad. The bad dojo looks very familiar though. It's a little class written in the style that seems often encouraged. In fact, many classes start life as something like this. Then as years go on, you and other colleagues add more features to the class and it's instantiation becomes a second
Post a Comment
Read more