http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20939594 en Wed, 11 Nov 2009 03:33:40 EDT Wed, 11 Nov 2009 03:33:40 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21092092 kmcmurtrie : I returned the Linksys. Not only was it lacking common features but the NAT sputtered and stalled constantly.

A Netgear FVS336G solved the problem quickly and painlessly. I can create custom NAT maps between WAN addresses and LAN addresses. All the machines are talking to each other at full Gigabit speed.

I highly recommend the Netgear FVS336G. It's the easiest to configure that I've ever seen.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21092092 Thu, 11 Sep 2008 03:30:50 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21066870 kmcmurtrie : Crap. I bought the RVS4000 "Business Series" router and found that it runs the "Home Series" software. It has fewer features than the cheap home router I already had. I'll have to return this rip-off to the store.

It's a shame that the other RV series aren't Gigabit yet. It means I'd have to put a Gigabit switch in front of it to get NAS running at a decent rate. It's major desk clutter.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21066870 Sat, 06 Sep 2008 04:38:08 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21062119 wa2ibm : Take a look at the Linksys RV0xx series of routers. In addition to the normal NAT function that maps internal devices to one external WAN addresses, it also allows mapping of additional (different) WAN address(es) to specific LAN addresses, thus allowing the use of the multiple static addresses (and ignoring DHCP on the WAN side).

I use an RV016 that provides for multiple WAN ports, VPN and the WAN to LAN mapping function. I only use one LAN port to feed my Gigabit switch, since the ports on the router are only 10/100 ports.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21062119 Fri, 05 Sep 2008 11:51:44 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20945873 kmcmurtrie : Thanks for the tip. The Motorola DSL modems do appear to support multiple WAN addresses. Advanced configuration instructions for the Netopia 2210 are completely missing, though. The owner's manual provides only a URL for advanced configuration and that URL is for different (obsolete?) products. Maybe I'll bug Motorola about it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20945873 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:32:32 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941614 burrowowl : This LAN setup (some systems with public IPs, others on local) has traditionally been handled by using a DSL bridge connected to a switch or hub, with each device on the switch bearing a public IP. One of these devices is configured as a NAT router doing DHCP on the local end, issuing its own local subnet (What JohnInSJ said).

Most SOHO routers are not set up to handle multiple WAN-side IPs in this way. I understand that the new Motorola 2210-02s have a Bridged + Routed mode that is meant to do pretty much what the OP is talking about here, though I have not tested it personally. The setup would then just be 2210-02 -> switch/hub (the 2210 only has one Ethernet jack) -> everything .

--
John Fitzgerald
Sonic.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20941614 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:18:36 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20940228 JohnInSJ : Yep. You don't want to do that.

The rule is simple - anything on the WAN side is going to be talking to sonic's DHCP. I don't know if you can ask them to disable DHCP service for your line, or if they even can.

Any router (including cheapo routers) can do NAT routing for you so you can properly configure your network into a LAN/WAN.

DSL Modem ->
Switch -> (N) PCs on WAN/Public IPS
-> Router/FW/Gateway -> Switch -> (N) PCs on LAN/Private IPs

sounds like what you want (it's what I do, anyway...)

You use port forwarding at the router/firewall to run public services on a machine with a private IP on your LAN, or you put the machine on the public side of your network (ie, off the first switch...)

]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20940228 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:44:51 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939691 guhuna : If I recall, Dane told us that you cant do DHCP and static at the same time.

I don't think there is a way around it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939691 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:00:45 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939594 kmcmurtrie : I recently switched to Sonic and I'm having some trouble with DHCP being active on their end.

With my previous ISP, I had a mixture of static WAN addresses and DHCP LAN addresses on one Gigabit Ethernet network. That worked because DHCP and LAN addresses wouldn't route through the modem. A small server (iMac) provided DHCP and allowed LAN devices to contact the Internet through NAT.

This doesn't work on Sonic. All of my network appliances talk to Sonic's DHCP service and acquire a public IP address. Imagine my surprise when a Roku Radio home page came up on my shiny new IP address. I tried blocking UDP ports 67 and 68 on my DSL modem but it turns out that Zoom's firewall is bypassed in bridged mode. My temporary solution is putting the modem behind a Linksys BEFSX41. This solution only takes advantage of single static IP address, though. For a machine to have another static IP address and have Gigabit Ethernet to the LAN, it must have two Ethernet ports and use a different physical network.

Does anyone have a better solution? My goal is to have private LAN addresses for network appliances and public WAN address for selected desktop computers on one physical network (one set of switches & one WAP). A router (software or hardware) must allow the LAN to access the internet (NTP, software updates, etc.). The WAN must be able to talk to the LAN at Gigabit speeds (NAS backups). It would be nice if the solution wasn't super-expensive. I know a professional router can fix this. My server (iMac) only has one Ethernet port :(

Thanks for any ideas.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20939594 Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:40:46 EDT