Search Results

Search found 5084 results on 204 pages for 'policy routing'.

Page 49/204 | < Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 | Next Page >

Dual Exchange 2010 on different VM + single public IP + multiple domains

- by Shivan Raptor

Here is the scenario: I have 2 Exchange Server 2010 on 2 different Virtual Machines, created by and based on Hyper-V. They have IP and domain: 192.168.5.11, domainA.com ; and 192.168.5.12, domainB.com respectively. The problem is, I only have 1 public IP, say 123.123.1.1 . How do I configure the settings so that I can successfully receive emails using both Exchange servers? Given that I cannot use single Exchange server for multiple domains. -- UPDATE -- To clarify, the domainA.com and domainB.com mentioned above are website domains, instead of multiple Active Directory forests. Users of the two Exchange Server shares the same Active Directory. I know that ONE Exchange Server can handle multiple domains, but I would like to separate them into different Virtual Machines, for load balancing and data separation.

Read the article
Route additional network through Sonicwall site-to-site VPN

- by Brandon

I have a sonicwall site to site vpn. At one of the sites there is another Cisco vpn to another site. I need to route the traffic for the cisco vpn through the site to site from the other sonicwall site. Site A - 10.10.0.0 /16 network Site B - 192.168.1.0 /24 Sonicwall, A cisco vpn is on 192.168.1.226 address and has routes the 10.10.0.0 network to Site A. Site C - 192.168.2.0 /24 Sonicwall Site A-B VPN is working Site B-C VPN is working I need to get Site C to transmit the 10.10.0.0 traffic over the VPN to site B and then out the Cisco device.

Read the article
Ping "replies" from same computer with 'Destination host unreachable' (no route to other computer)

- by Srekel

I've got two computers in a LAN behind a wireless router. One has XP with ip 192.168.1.2 This one has W7 with ip 192.168.1.7 If I try to ping the other one from this computer, I get this: C:\Users\Srekel>ping 192.168.1.2 Pinging 192.168.1.2 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 192.168.1.7: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.7: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.7: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.7: Destination host unreachable. Ping statistics for 192.168.1.2: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Tracert gives the same result: C:\Users\Srekel>tracert 192.168.1.2 Tracing route to 192.168.1.2 over a maximum of 30 hops 1 Kakburken4 [192.168.1.7] reports: Destination host unreachable. Trace complete. Although I can ping and tracert the router without any problems. I have disabled the firewalls on both computers. The router is set to use DHCP (if that matters). Here is the output from "route". C:\Users\Srekel>route print =========================================================================== Interface List 13...00 25 86 df c6 89 ......TP-LINK Wireless N Adapter 12...e0 cb 4e 26 b9 84 ......Realtek PCIe GBE Family Controller #2 11...e0 cb 4e 26 be 94 ......Realtek PCIe GBE Family Controller 1...........................Software Loopback Interface 1 16...00 00 00 00 00 00 00 e0 Microsoft ISATAP Adapter #2 14...00 00 00 00 00 00 00 e0 Teredo Tunneling Pseudo-Interface =========================================================================== IPv4 Route Table =========================================================================== Active Routes: Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.7 20 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.1.7 276 192.168.1.7 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.7 276 192.168.1.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.7 276 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.1.7 276 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.1.7 276 =========================================================================== Persistent Routes: None IPv6 Route Table =========================================================================== Active Routes: If Metric Network Destination Gateway 14 58 ::/0 On-link 1 306 ::1/128 On-link 14 58 2001::/32 On-link 14 306 2001:0:5ef5:73ba:881:20c1:3f57:fef8/128 On-link 14 306 fe80::/64 On-link 14 306 fe80::881:20c1:3f57:fef8/128 On-link 1 306 ff00::/8 On-link 14 306 ff00::/8 On-link =========================================================================== Persistent Routes: None I've set up and debugged a few networks in my life but I'm not really an advanced network user, so I'm not sure what might be wrong. Any ideas? Oh, and pinging this computer from the other computer doesn't work either.

Read the article
Loadbalancing outbound traffic while using openbgpd on freebsd

- by Rajkumar S

Hi, I am using openbgpd in freeBSD with 2 ISP connections. I have my own AS number and a /22 network. Currently I am advertising entire /22 to both networks. Inbound traffic comes in But my outbound traffic goes via a single link. I would like to either distribute my outbound traffic via both links so that outbound traffic is also load balanced. How to configure this using openbgpd in freebsd? My current openbgpd config is attached for reference. AS 00my-as listen on xx.xx.xx.x router-id xx.xx.xx.x network aa.aa.aa.0/22 group "ISP1" { remote-as 11remoteas-1 neighbor bb.bb.bb.1 { descr "ISP1" announce all } } group "ISP2" { remote-as 22remoteas-2 neighbor cc.cc.cc.37 { descr "ISP2" announce all } } deny from any deny to any allow from bb.bb.bb.1 allow to bb.bb.bb.1 allow from cc.cc.cc.37 allow to cc.cc.cc.37

Read the article
ip-up does not trigger when using built-in cisco vpn on mac osx lion

- by Yasser Sobhdel

I am using Cisco VPN client over lion and I want to make the ip-up and ip-down work. There is no sign of any action taken when I connect or disconnect this VPN connection. I really doubt whether the syntax has been changed or even this kind if connection is triggering the ip-up. Logically, it must be set over ppp but when using the following codes and instructions on them, there is no sign of any output in the log file: http://www.macfreek.nl/mindmaster/Modify_PPTP_Routing_Table http://www.aidanfindlater.com/use-vpn-for-specific-sites-on-mac-os-x Going for error, which there is no sign of it, using the following page: http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20060616150640529 I couldn't find the /var/log/ppp/vpnd.log log file. Also the files are given full permission 0755 or a+x or even 777 using the following command: sudo chmod a+x /etc/ppp/ip-up Any clue on how to debug this would be appreciated. I am totally confused, netstat -rn -f inet doesn't show the routes. Even when the routes are added manually, closing the VPN connection does not run the ip-down and the routes must be deleted manually.

Read the article
Changing subnet-mask of class-c network host to 255.255.0.0

- by Prashant Mandhare

We have a existing class-c network with IP address range 11.22.33.44/24 (just for example). My domain controller has been configured within this subnet. So all servers within this subnet have subnet mask configured to 255.255.255.0. Now we have got a new subnet with IP address 11.22.88.99/24 (note that only last 2 octets have changed). I want all new hosts in this new subnet to join my existing DC. For this we have configured firewall properly so allow this. (so there is no issue with firewall). But initially I was not able to join hosts in new subnet in existing domain. Later I doubted on subnet mask used in domain controller (255.255.255.0) and for testing purpose I changed it to 255.255.0.0, it worked like charm, i was able to join subnet-2 hosts in subnet-1 domain. Now i am wondering whether it will be good practice to change subnet mask of a class-c network to 255.255.0.0? Can any issues arise due to this? Experts please provide your opinion.

Read the article
Force Windows Local Subnet Traffic through a Gateway

- by Beerey

Hi all, We are attempting to route all traffic from a certain machine to a gateway. This works ok for traffic destined for subnets outside of the machine's subnet. However, traffic to machines in the same subnet as the source machine goes through an On-Link gateway in Windows. This means that the default gateway is ignored, and traffic in a subnet (for example, 192.168.50.10 - 192.168.50.11) flows. Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric 192.168.50.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.50.214 276 This route can be deleted from Windows, but when the machine is rebooted it always comes back. Adding a persistant static route to the gateway with a lower metric doesn't work, since it will still try the On-Link gateway after the persistant route fails. Adding each machine in a VLAN isn't an option due to the setup we have Adding a startup script to delete the gateway isn't a great option either, since users will have full admin access to the machine and might disable the script. We cannot transperantly intercept all network traffic on the subnet using Gratuitous ARPs or transparent proxying, since there are other machines on the subnet which use a different gateway The only way we have gotten it to work is by adding a persistant route to the gateway for the subnet traffic, and deleting the On-link route on reboot. The question is then. Is there a way to permanently remove this On-link route If not, is there a way to otherwise force even local subnet traffic to go through a gateway?

Read the article
Distributed development staff needing a common IP range

- by bakasan

I work on a development staff that is geographically distributed, mostly all throughout the state of CA, but several key members also must travel frequently. We rely quite heavily on a 3rd party provider API for a great deal of our subsystems (can't get into who it is or what they do). The 3rd party however is quite stringent on network access and have no notion of a development sandbox. Access is restricted to 2, 3 IP numbers and that's about it. Once we account for our production servers, that leaves us with an IP or two to spare for our dev team--which is still problematic as people's home IP changes, people travel, we have more than 2 devs, etc. Wide IP blocks are not permitted by the 3rd party. Nor will they allow dynamic DNS type services. There is no simple console to swap IPs on the fly either (e.g. if a dev's IP at home changes or they are on the road). As none of us are deep network experts, I'm wondering what our viable options are? Are there such things as 3rd party hosts to VPNs? Generally I think of a VPN as a mechanism to gain access to a home office, but the notion would be a 3rd party VPN that we'd all connect to and we'd register this as an IP origin w/ our 3rd party. We've considered using Amazon EC2 to effectively host a dev environment for each dev and using that to connect. Amazon only gives you so many static IPs however (I believe 5?) so this would only be a stop gap solution until our team size out strips our IP count at Amazon. Those were the only viable thoughts that I had, but again, I'm far from a networking guy. Tried searching for similar threads, but I'm not even sure I know the right vernacular to look around for.

Read the article
Calculating and billing IP multicast usage on the Internet

- by obvio171

I've been searching for the reasons why IP multicast isn't widely supported on the Public Internet, and a commonly-cited reason is the difficulty ISPs have in tracking Multicast usage for later billing. Given this difficulty, since ISPs control the routers and they're not forced to support Multicast (as per IPv4), they just disable it. I couldn't find what this difficulty was though. Since an ISP has full control of any inbound and outbound traffic, be it Unicast or Multicast, what's the difficulty in tracking and billing the latter that does not exist in the former?

Read the article
Setup VPN access on a windows dedicated server for browsing

- by Pasta

I have a dedicated windows server. I want to create a VPN to encrypt my traffic (browsing, IM, etc) as I browse on my laptop using public wifi networks. What keywords should I be using to search Google? Are there any resources that help me do this? Most of the solutions are just to encrypt communication between the server to a machine. It does not act like an internet gateway, etc.

Read the article
linksys Rvo16 redundant link config

- by Adeodatus

Hi All I have been given an RVO16 to play with. I'm multihomed and I'd like to set it up so that my primary, highest bandwidth link receives all traffic and the other connection is a hot spare basically. I want them both online but only the primary 1 used until it goes down then all traffic should automatically failover to the secondary link. Those of you that have played on an RVO16, can I do this and if so, how? I imagine I'd have it act as a router and pad the route on one so that the other is never used unless the primary is down. How? Thanks all.

Read the article
Split horizon, route filtering, and having RIPv2 announce a non-attached route to host

- by Paul

Routers A, B & C live at 10.1.1.1, 10.1.1.2 and 10.1.1.3 on a /24 metro Ethernet subnet. Each router also has its own private subnet on another interface. Router B's private subnet links thru a firewall to a 10.20.20.0 network at another organization. Router B redistributes to A and C several static routes for hosts on 10.20.20.0. However, a new host 10.20.20.5/32 must be reached via a different path that goes through router C. I know that C can advertise this host-based route with no problem, but I'd like to keep all my 10.20.20.x static routes in one place. So, how can B tell A via RIPv2 to send packets for 10.20.20.5/32 to C? So far it looks like I need no ip split-horizon on router B's 10.1.1.2 interface, perhaps because B has already learned from C other routes with a next hop of 10.1.1.3. But how does RIPv2 split horizon with no auto-summary and network 10.0.0.0 really work? If B learns a route to ANY 10.x.x.x network or host from A or C, is that enough for split horizon to keep it from redistributing ip route 10.20.20.5 255.255.255.255 10.1.1.3? And if I want to suspend split horizon only for this one new host, how do I filter out the mess of regurgitated routes that B advertises when I try no ip split-horizon? Thanks much.

Read the article
How to connect devices behind Comcast router/modem with devices behind wireless router

- by deeperDATA

I know this is going to seem like a simple solution but I have been unable to find a clear answer through Google. Simple office setup: I have a Comcast modem/router that has 4 hard wired ports. In one of those ports I have a Cisco wireless router which also has 4 of its own ports. What is the method for getting devices behind the modem/router to ping/communicate with devices behind the wireless router? They are all on the same subnet but the IP ranges differ. The router produces 192.168.1.1 by default while the Comcast modem/router produces 10.1.10.1 by default. I think what I'm attempting to do might be considered "extending" the modem/router's network but I'm not sure. Thank you in advance for your assistance.

Read the article
Dual NIC internet access

- by JavaRocky

Q1. If a computer had two NICs, lets say windows, on which interface would HTTP traffic (or any for that matter) go out on. Not sure how the routes table would look like. Q2. If one of the NICs link becomes unresponsive, would traffic be automatically routed to the other NIC? Thanks.

Read the article
Restrict VPN client traffic to certain domains/IP

- by mr-euro

Hi Is there any way to restrict a VPN client to only route certain traffic via the VPN and the rest via their local gateway? For example: traffic to a certain IP or domain gets routed across the VPN and all other requests do not. Let me know if you need more details. Thank you.

Read the article
Multiple public IPs through DD-WRT without 1-to-1 NAT

- by Stephen Touset

I've done a search here and wasn't able to find anything relevant to my situation. I apologize in advance if I've missed an existing post on the topic. Our ISP has provided us with 6 static IP addresses. We are currently using two of them (plus one for the Comcast-provided router). One of the static addresses routes to our internal network, and the other goes to our VOIP phone system. Unfortunately, the Comcast machine doesn't support QoS, so our VOIP calls have been choppy. We plan to put the Comcast-provided router into bridge mode and replace it with an ASUS RT-N16 running DD-WRT. However, I'm unsure how to set up DD-WRT to function similarly to our existing Comcast router. The Comcast router's WAN IP is the first of our static IP addresses. We did not need to provide an internal LAN IP address — simply connecting machines that use our other public addresses to the LAN ports on the Comcast router is enough for it to route between the connected machines and our internet connection. Is there a way to do a similar setup through the DD-WRT? Thanks in advance.

Read the article
Passing OpenVPN road-warrior traffic through tunnel pfsense

- by Chris

I have a local LAN (10.100.100.0/24) and OpenVPN road-warriors (10.99.99.0/24). pfSense is regulating all this as follows: LAN: 10.100.100.105 WAN: 10.100.99.1 (connected to DSL Router which connects to internet). OPT1: 10.99.99.0 (OpenVPN tun0). There is an IPSec connection between my office and another office where my LAN can work on a specific IP address (sql server to be exact) on 192.168.30.41. My problem is that I wish my OpenVPN road-warrior clients to be able to use the IPSec service on 192.168.30.41 as well (which at present they cannot despite the fact that I am pushing the route 192.168.30.0 255.255.255.0). The other site's administrator cannot add the extra route for my openvpn clients for a lot of reasons which I am not going to enter at this stage. Is there a possibility that I could NAT all of my openVPN road-warriors requests through a local LAN IP address (something like 10.100.100.250 which is not used by anything on my LAN). The problem is that I am a newbie with pfSense so as much step-by-step help as possible would be very much appreciated! Thank you. C.

Read the article
Access internal IP using public IP

- by willvv

Hi, I have a DSL modem with a public IP address (201.206.x.x), and I have a web server in my internal network (192.168.0.50). I set up the modem to forward requests to port 80 to my web server, so, if I access 201.206.x.x from outside my network, it shows my web page, the same happens if I access 192.168.0.50 from a computer inside my network. Now, the problem is when I try to access 201.206.x.x from my internal network, the browser tries to connect to the DSL modem configuration, instead of redirecting my request to my Web server. Which settings do I have to change in the modem to set up this redirection? Thanks!

Read the article
Ping only works after about 30 seconds

- by Ricardo Polo

Today I am working on this issue and I would love your ideas. There is a network with something like this LAN 1 -- WAN CHANNEL--- LAN 2 The LAN 1 have two segments. When I make a ping from LAN 1 segment 1 it works like a charm. When I make a ping from LAN 1 segment 2 I have no ping, but after about 30 seconds of continues ping (ping -t) it start to work perfect. After some time of no activity with the destination host the issue happens again. Tracing the route packets stops in the last router before the target. This is the first router in LAN 2 after the WAN channel. In the next screenshot you can see thie issue, the first ping is before a continuos ping and the second one is while continous ping is running. Thank you in advance

Read the article
Forward differing hostnames to different internal IPs through NAT router

- by abrereton

Hi, I have one public IP address, one router and multiple servers behind the router. I would like to forward differing domains (All using HTTP) through the router to different servers. For example: example1.com => 192.168.0.110 example2.com => 192.168.0.120 foo.example2.com => 192.168.0.130 bar.example2.com => 192.168.0.140 I understand that this could be accomplished using Port Forwarding, but I need all hosts running on port 80. I found some information about IP Masquerading, but I found this difficult to understand, and I am not sure if it is what I am after. Another solution I have found is to direct all traffic to Reverse Proxy server, which forwards the requests onto the appropriate server. What about iptables? I am using a Billion 7404 VNPX router. Is there a feature that this router has that can accomplish this? Are these my only options? Have I missed something completely? Is one recommended over the others? I have searched around but I don't think I am hitting the correct keywords. Thanks in advance.

Read the article
Fritz!Box IPv6-Address different than IPv6-Prefix

- by kmindi

In my Fritzbox it states the following: IPv6-Adresse: 2a02:8070:600::14b6:c7******, Gültigkeit: 100465/86065s IPv6-Präfix: 2a02:8070:62c:3200::/56, Gültigkeit: 100464/86064s I am not able to connect to IPv6 Addresses from computers configured by the fritzbox, because they get an address with prefix 2a02:8070:62c:3200::/56 but somehow the fritzbox does not route those addresses. Is this because the IPv6-Address is not in the prefix range? The address of the Fritzbox responds to pings, but my computers reached via various addresses from the prefix range do not (: PING 2a02:8070:62c:3200:28d****(2a02:8070:62c:3200:28d****) 32 data bytes From 2a02:8070:600:0:14b6*** icmp_seq=0 Destination unreachable: Administratively prohibited From 2a02:8070:600:0:14b6*** icmp_seq=1 Destination unreachable: Administratively prohibited From 2a02:8070:600:0:14b6*** icmp_seq=2 Destination unreachable: Administratively prohibited From 2a02:8070:600:0:14b6*** icmp_seq=3 Destination unreachable: Administratively prohibited blocked ping this is "view" from outside From inside the ping6 looks like this: traceroute -6 heise.de traceroute to heise.de (2a02:2e0:3fe:100::8), 30 hops max, 80 byte packets 1 fritz.box (2a02:8070:62c:3200:****) 0.787 ms 1.424 ms 1.702 ms 2 * * * ...... 30 * * *

Read the article
Can fragments of a packet be refragmented again?

- by gsinha

In IPv4, fragmentation is done by routers on way to the destination if DF(do not fragment) flag is not set in the IP packet. Once a packet is fragmented, its fragments may take different paths (due to various reasons like topology changes) to the destination. If, on some link again in the path to destination, one routers find that the link MTU is smaller than the frame size, then either the packet needs to be fragmented or dropped. Can fragments of a packet be refragmented again? If yes, what will be the value of MF flag in the new individual fragments created by this?

Read the article
How to force certain traffic through GRE tunnel?

- by wew

Here's what I do. Server (public internet is 222.x.x.x): echo 'net.ipv4.ip_forward=1' >> /etc/sysctl.conf sysctl -p iptunnel add gre1 mode gre local 222.x.x.x remote 115.x.x.x ttl 255 ip add add 192.168.168.1/30 dev gre1 ip link set gre1 up iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.168.0/30 -j SNAT --to-source 222.x.x.x iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -d 222.x.x.x -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.168.2 Client (public internet is 115.x.x.x): iptunnel add gre1 mode gre local 115.x.x.x remote 222.x.x.x ttl 255 ip add add 192.168.168.2/30 dev gre1 ip link set gre1 up echo '100 tunnel' >> /etc/iproute2/rt_tables ip rule add from 192.168.168.0/30 table tunnel ip route add default via 192.168.168.1 table tunnel Until here, all seems going right. But then 1st question, how to use GRE tunnel as a default route? Client computer is still using 115.x.x.x interface as default. 2nd question, how to force only ICMP traffic to go through tunnel, and everything else go default interface? I try doing this in client computer: ip rule add fwmark 200 table tunnel iptables -t mangle -A OUTPUT -p udp -j MARK --set-mark 200 But after doing this, my ping program will timeout (if I not doing 2 command above, and using ping -I gre1 ip instead, it will works). Later I want to do something else also, like only UDP port 53 through tunnel, etc. 3rd question, in client computer, I force one mysql program to listen on gre1 interface 192.168.168.2. In client computer, there's also one more public interface (IP 114.x.x.x)... How to forward traffic properly using iptables and route so mysql also respond a request coming from this 114.x.x.x public interface?

Read the article
How to redirect all Internet traffic to OpenVPN Server

- by JuliaS

I have seen working solutions around the issue of forcing Internet traffic to go through the OpenVPN server but they are all done in Linux, all I want to know is how to add an entry to the route table in windows to make this happen. connectivity between the client and server is fine, my Windows 7 client can establish a connection to the Windows 2008 Server, but when established Internet traffic is still going from the local Windows 7 machine. Here are the details: Server: Windows 2008 Server with one NIC OpenVPN IP Address: 192.168.0.1 Local NIC IP Address (connects the server to the Internet): 10.242.69.107 Client: Windows 7 with one NIC OpenVPN IP Address: 192.168.0.2 ISP allocated IP Address: 10.0.8.2 (gateway 10.0.8.1) Server OpenVPN Config: dev tun ifconfig 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.2 secret static.key push "redirect-gateway def1" Client OpenVPN Config: remote xxx.xxx.com dev tun ifconfig 192.168.0.2 192.168.0.1 secret static.key I'm not an expert with adding routes...etc. I would be grateful if someone could let me know how to add this entry in my server/client route table. EDIT: Output from the client's netstat -rnv IPv4 Route Table =========================================================================== Active Routes: Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.8.1 10.0.8.2 20 10.0.8.0 255.255.255.252 On-link 10.0.8.2 276 10.0.8.2 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.0.8.2 276 10.0.8.3 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.0.8.2 276 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.252 On-link 192.168.0.2 286 192.168.0.2 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.0.2 286 192.168.0.3 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.0.2 286 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 10.0.8.2 276 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.0.2 286 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.0.8.2 276 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.0.2 286 ===========================================================================

Read the article
Using Static Public IPs and Private DHCP IPs on the Same Router

- by Andrew Larsson

I have a subnet of public IP addresses that my ISP has provided me with. They are routed through my router (how profound) that has a a static IP. I have successfully assigned the IPs from that subnet to various devices on my network. This works just fine, they get their own public IP, they can access the Internet, and the Internet can access them. However, I would like to also assign some private IPs on my network through that same router and put them behind NAT. Is this even possible? Could a VLAN be of use? I would like to avoid putting another router on the network, which makes this is quite an awkward question.

Read the article

< Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 | Next Page >