please see my replies below! Thank you
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 02:43:17PM +0100, Bernd Schoeller wrote: > On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 02:20:15PM +0100, FTP wrote: > > but isn't a way to route and translate connections via a existing static IP > > address? To have 'internal' IPs acting as static in their own right? > > How do ISPs 'create' their own static IPs? > > Gee - we are talking about a huge area of topics here: > > First, ISP<->ISP traffic is handled way differently compared to > MyLittleComputer<->ISP traffic (read up on the IP-protocol, > PI-networks, BGP, OSPF, etc.) > I understand that! :-( > Second, you can always use NAT to translate your internal IP addresses > and ports to different ports (under a single address) on you router, > but that is probably what you already have and not what you want. > correct. I have that already! > Third, if you live in a house with a single address, you cannot > publicly start announcing different addresses without the postal > service knowing about it. If packets should arrive at your home, then > you better make sure you write your street and number on the > announcement, other things just won't work. > No but I use the following format: address+office1 ... address+officeN! That's what I try to achieve with the IPs as well but without having to use port numbers! > Last but not least: _if_ your ADSL provider will assign and route > multiple addresses to your router (for example a complete C network), > then you can - of course - translate the different numbers into > different numbers in your internal network. But then: why you are not > using these IPs for your internal network directly? > well, that's not case. But even then, how can a ISP assign a complete C network just like this? What's behind that? > Bernd
