<snip> Can the Sonicwall handle more than one internal IP range (ie 192.168.0.1, 192.168.1.1, 192.168.2.1)? </snip>
Yes. Go to General/Network/Add LAN Subnet - put in your second LAN IP address and mask. FYI - We have one physical subnet and are changing numbering schemes. Currently we have 192.168.x.y (with static IP's) and are going to 10.x.y.z (via DHCP). We have our SW Pro answering on both 192.168.x.y and 10.1.x.y. When the last machine is moved to a 10 address, we will delete the 192 number on the sonicwall. Hth, Devin L. Meade, CNE, MCP Network Administrator Frankfurt-Short-Bruza www.fsb-ae.com -----Original Message----- From: Chris Hunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 2:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [SonicWALL]- Bandwidth Sharing After Annual Report Season I'll be renumbering my public IPs so I should have a few extra. I'm using abovenet #'s and their parent company (metromedia fiber looks to follow the Chap 11 bandwagon) I was thinking that by using private IPs I could save on getting public IPs and if/when I change ISPs (trying to get fiber into the Industrial Park) I would not have to renumber my clients. Can the Sonicwall handle more than one internal IP range (ie 192.168.0.1, 192.168.1.1, 192.168.2.1)? One of the benefits of the LAN connection is that the filter list works to block naughty sites for business users. A DMZ connection does not offer this. Chris At 11:30 AM 04/08/2002 -0700, you wrote: >Actually, IMO there are a number of possible designs, depending on what >you want to allow or not. > >The place where I'm at just recently went through another >transformation... Where a number of separate businesses share >officespace and typically Internet bandwidth. > >In a previous configuration, I placed one company's physical network >"behind" another network. Using default gateways and static routing, I >enabled the "behind" network's gateway to point directly to the Internet >Gateway through the other network. No one on each network could see the >other at all (except for my own machine which was configured multi-homed >on both networks for administration). > >My current configuration physically connects two company's networks >because they share a broadcast-based service... But through subnetting ><normally> each company can only see its own machines. Because all it >would take is to use a less restrictive subnetmask to see the other >network, it's less secure than the first design. > >The design John describes should work also, "DMZ" is only a name to >describe one of the zones in a multi-homed router with configurable >rules for each zone. --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude/F-Prot Virus] ============================================================================ ======================= To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the email put the following: unsubscribe sonicwall your_name The archive of this list is at http://www.mail-archive.com/sonicwall%40peake.com/ --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude/F-Prot Virus] =================================================================================================== To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the email put the following: unsubscribe sonicwall your_name The archive of this list is at http://www.mail-archive.com/sonicwall%40peake.com/
