lutful
Premium
join:2005-06-16
Ottawa, ON
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
| Re: NAT behind NAT not a bad thing ? said by Airplane777  :This causes me to be doing NAT behind NAT. Am I correct in thinking that this should work ok? That is...NAT behind NAT, isn't necessarily a bad thing? I setup a few tiny rural networks this way - to the best of my recollection - in 2004/5:
A DSL home's NAT router (10.1.1.1) to wireless backhaul to rural home's NAT router (10.2.1.1) to broadcast AP to multiple CPEs and NAT routers (10.3.1.1).
Each NAT router has at least one local customer PC served by DHCP. The wisp radios are on static IP for easier management.
We usually hardcode good DNS server addresses at NAT routers but leaving them as 10.x.1.1 also works as most NAT routers implement DNS caching.
It works for all common internet apps including most VoIP and some VPN. GoToMyPC and VNC also works. |
