Sorry for this off-topic, but I think that is already off-topic from the
previous message. (suggestions on where to ask this are accepted)
I'm using a DSL modem router Ericsson connecting using pppoe that have a nat
and DHCP providing one LAN address (10.0.0.4) to a WIFI Linksys Router that
get that LAN address as its WAN address and provide nat and DHCP to the
"real" lan 192.168.1.xxx wired and wireless machines.
Graphically:
{Clients} ----->WIFI Linksys Router-------> DSL Ericsson Modem
Router ------> Internet
(192.168.1.xxx) (192.168.1.1/10.0.0.4) (10.0.0.1/dyn public ip
address)
I'm not a IP/Network expert but I'm sure I'm doing something wrong using 2
routers(with its services nat,dhcp,etc.) to provide internet access to the
lan computers.
My question is which is the 'elegant' way to provide internet access to the
lan with this equipment?
should I convert the WIFI Linksys router into an access point? is this
possible?, how?
The DSL Ericsson modem router has a bridge feature, but not sure how to use
it.
Any ideas are welcome!!
Thanks in advance!
Sergio
Argentina
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 07:42:10 -0600
> From: Angelo Sarto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Angelo Sarto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: PicaRules <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Getting past *two* NAT routers
> Cc: [email protected]
>
> You are correct it is not necessarily any different then what you are
> doing now, but it moves services off of the Mac and onto the router,
> allowing you to turn on and off the Mac without affecting Internet
> connectivity. Additionally a typical SOHO router usually provides
> much more configuration options than ICS services (mac or pc).
>
> as for john solution this should work but we are simply reshuffling
> the same components around and it has a chance of failure depending on
> the operation of the ZyXel.
>
> Current Network
>
> {Clients} ----->Hub ------> Mac -------> Zyxel ------> Internet
> (PAT) (NAT)
>
> John's Solution
> {Clients + MAC} ----->Hub -------> Zyxel ------> Internet
> (PAT)
>
> My first prooposed solution
> {Clients + MAC} ----->Router-------> Zyxel ------> Internet
> (PAT) (NAT)
>
> You are correct that John's solution should work but now you will be
> doing PAT on a router that has limited options, and may not support
> PAT very well. Additionally forwarding may be much more difficult in
> this situation. The reason why I proposed the solution are the
> following:
>
> 1. The router purchased can be completely controlled by you
> 2. Their would be no need for any computer in your network to support
> Internet connectivity. (that is any could be turned off)
> 3. This will allow you to replace the ZyXel device with a modem if
> you wish (and your ISP is okay with it)
> 4. You can change service providers, other DSL ISP or even medium
> (cable modem) with only a single setting change (change the router's
> WAN type and address).
>
>
>
> --Angelo
>
>
> On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 22:03:20 -0800 (PST), PicaRules
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > >From: Angelo Sarto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > >Jumping in a little bit there is still one question I have....
> > >
> > >does your integrated device provide no firewall capability? I mean if
> > >the integrate device exposes its only interal IP (.1.2) completely to
> > >the internet?
> >
> > No. The router portion of the ZyXEL exposes only the external IP;
> > I didn't think any 192.168.x.x addresses could even be seen except on
> > the LAN side of *any* router (as Alan states).
> >
> > >
> > >If this is the case, or you can place that IP in the dmz, or bridge
> > >mode may do this as well, then perhaps your answer is simple.
> > >
> > >1. simply purchase an ethernet router - e.g. a dlink or linksys
device.
> > >2. change its wan type to static IP
> > >3. assign it's ip to 192.168.1.2
> > >4. pretend your other device is just a modem, do all forwarding on
> > >the new router.
> >
> > Alan, I don't see how this is any more "elegant" than what I've been
doing all along. The Mac is already a true NAT router in and of itself, not
a bridge. Its second NIC connects to a hub, and the rest of the LAN uses
that interface's IP, 192.168.2.1, as the gateway.
> >
> > "Elegant" would be eliminating one or the other router and its address
translation. John's is the elegant solution--change the netmask
simultaneously with the Size of Client IP pool, and attach the ZyXEL to the
hub. This relieves the Mac of its need for a second NIC, reducing rather
than increasing the hardware involved.
> >
> > Thanks to everyone for sharing your knowledge. The only unanswered
question is how one would talk to the device at all if it became a bridge.
That one's for ZyXEL.
>
> --__--__--
_______________________________________________
VNC-List mailing list
[email protected]
To remove yourself from the list visit:
http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
