Ah… I thought the OP was only looking for internet access.
If so, then the seperate VM and RRAS configuration is a lot of work just for that…. -sc From: Richard Stovall [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 9:49 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Simple Networking Question? Yep, but I don’t know of a way to poke holes through it if you need to for any reason. From: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 9:42 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Simple Networking Question? I just fully read this thread. VMWare Workstation can NAT directly. No need for separate VM and/or RRAS, is there? -sc From: Richard Stovall [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 9:37 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Simple Networking Question? By using a dedicated ‘router’ VM and setting its ‘private’ interface IP as the default gateway on the rest of the VMs, they can all access the internet if everything is set up correctly. This is the way I set up test VM networks and get all the machines patched, etc. From: David Lum [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 9:18 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Simple Networking Question? Nice thread….Can the DC in the environment also hit the Internet? Dave From: Bryan Garmon [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 10:30 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Simple Networking Question? Thank you - i have this working wonderfully now. To recap: VM gets 2 nics - 1 for 10.x and a 2nd for 169.x Default gateway is set only on the 10.x nic RRAS is configured as NAT/firewall on the private network (169.x) On each client machine, default gateway is set to IP of the server that has the two nics. Works great. Thank you very much. On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Richard Stovall <[email protected]> wrote: I always setup a non-domain VM (though it could be a member I suppose) and configure RRAS as a basic NAT firewall for the private VM network. They are not bridged this way, but it works quite well. You can forward ports through the firewall for the physical machines that need to get access. Simple, cheap and fast. From: Andrew Levicki [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 12:08 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Simple Networking Question? Hi Bryan, If you mean 169.254.x.x then you're out of luck as that is an APIPA address and APIPA cannot be routed to other subnets, (which includes the Internet). See http://www.petri.co.il/whats_apipa.htm for more info. Regards, Andrew 2009/12/9 Bryan Garmon <[email protected]> Today is one of those days where my brain is just not working well. I could use some help. I have a virtual 2003 AD test environment running under VMWare Workstation 7 including DNS,DHCP. Each virtual is configured to use vmware's bridged networking and I am using 169.x network for all of the virtual lab machines. It's bridged and not nat'd because I have several phyiscal machines that need to communicate with the virtuals. This works great except for 1 problem - none of the virtual machines have internet access. I have not configured any of the virtuals to have a default gateway. The host machine and the rest of my network is 10.x. How can i get the 169.x network to have internet access? ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
