stereoptic wrote: > Thanks for the reply. The second router is not really connected in > series, it is on 192.168._0_.1 while the router on the router/modem > combo is 192.168._1_.1 . > I understand the risks of LMS not being secure. It is password > protected with the understanding that the encryption is not very > effective. If there was one drawback to the LMS ecosystem, it is > security for remote connections. I know that there are other methods, > but I haven't had the time (or courage) to try them out.
stereoptic wrote: > I had to log into the Comcast modem (10.0.0.1) and also port forward > 9000 and 3483 on the modem in order to connect remotely. Does that make > sense? You have 3 networks (may you dont use the 3rd - but without a diagramm or some routing info its hard to tell) 10.x.x.x/24 is a private network even 192.x.x.x/24 so you must have a 4th network (the external ip from your ISP). 1st device must route between this external ip and your internal net (10.x.x.x/24) So its clear that your nat roule must be at this point. 2.nd net is one of these 192.x.x.x and since the 1.st device is only routing from external to 10.x.x.x you may added a nat rule from xyz to 10.x.x.x. and thats the reason why you need another rule inside that 192.x.x.x net. And for sure nat is very very bad in times of these payme encryption worms and the fact you already have a rpi in your net and there are plenty of how2 openvpn with rpi - i would say (write) you must have more courage to use NAT than setup some openvpn - but its your money and your time :o Gruss Jan ------------------------------------------------------------------------ DJanGo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1516 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105521 _______________________________________________ Squeezecenter mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/squeezecenter
