Jaroslaw:
Heya. Similar to Jerry's suggestion, if you run a tunneling
utility (like SSH, EchoVNC, or even a SSL VPN) across the router, you
don't need to open one-port-per-PC.
For VNC, it's relatively easy to workaround this limitation,
obviously. But for other apps that use a set of TCP/UDP ports, a
tunnel may be the only scalable solution.
cheers,
Scott
<snip>
I still don't get your point.
Suppose you have 30 VNC servers on a NAT'ed LAN and want to connect to them
from outside.
Certainly you will have to forward 30 ports *on the router* to those 30
machines to be able to connect.
Ie. if external address of the router is x.x.x.x
then x.x.x.x:5900 is forwarded to, say 192.168.0.10:5900
x.x.x.x:5901 is forwarded to 192.168.0.11:5900
x.x.x.x:5902 is forwarded to 192.168.0.12:5900
and so on...
How do you want to connect without port forwarding?
<snip>
_______________________________________________
VNC-List mailing list
[email protected]
To remove yourself from the list visit:
http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
