ADSL 2+ router recommendation please - mixed network

Hi,

I'm looking for a router that can do pass-through via ethernet on a
range of IPs yet allow me to NAT the wireless interface.

So, let's say for example that my real IP range is 1.2.3.0/28

..1 is the router
..2 to .14 serviced by the ethernet interface and connected to unix boxen
..15 to wifi interface running NAT which services windows laptops
wirelessly

I currently have a speedtouch 585v7 and cannot use its wireless
interface because turning NAT on turns it on the whole router not just
on one interface. In this sutuation I have connected a netgear adsl
router to it via the ethernet port using a port on the LAN interface of
the netgear. I've given that a real ip (.15) and nat behind the wifi
interface (again, on this router, NAT is either on or off on the entire
router)

So is there any router that will allow me to non-NAT and NAT?

thanks

--
comp.john

"Daniel James" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <ifkbkb$76t$(E-Mail Removed)>, Comp.john wrote:
>> So is there any router that will allow me to non-NAT and NAT?
>
> Draytek Vigor routers certainly do ... I'd surprised if many others
> don't.
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel.
>
>

I am looking for something similar - what should I be looking for in the
specs - currently I have * i/p addresses (in realiy this is 5) I need to map
4 to xboxes to give a direct 1:1 connection (open NAT in xbox terms) and the
other i/p is then NAT ed for multiple computers etc see
http://www.zen107481.zen.co.uk/nettop3.jpg for network

This means I have multiple rouers running all the time - ideally I would
like an 8 port router (have a separate adsl moden available) that I can then
assign 4 Non NAT ports for xboxes and 4 for AP and other wired computers

Any Ideas

Nik

On 2011-01-04, HappyHunter <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Hub/Switch. So, as far as the router is concerned, the 4 LAN ports are 1
> single LAN, and can only be configured as that. So, it's either NAT or
> no-NAT. I reckon, internally, the wireless part, is bridged to the wired
> LAN part, and therefore, in router terms, still a single LAN interface.

This is useful information. I was unaware that the wireless part was
bridged to the wired part or that this was commonplace.

> The way you are doing it just now, is OK, and unless you want to get
> into more expensive business type devices, then stick with what you've
> got. I've had a wee look at the Draytek stuff, and if you want to persue
> it, then I'd email them, with a note of what you are looking for, and
> see if they've got a product that meets your requirements. It will
> probably cost a bit more than the average home router.

I figured this might be the case. At work I'm used to dealing with cisco
gear which can do this kind of thing. I don't know a lot about the
specifics of other routers and i don't want to pay through the nose for
a cisco.

> I'm not quite sure why you're wanting to do pass through on so many
> devices, I take it they are not passing through to the internet ?

I do testing and run servers (openbsd/freebsd/linux) on the wired
network and on these systems firewalling is adequately handled at
the OS level. Not having to think about NAT is one less headache.
Wirelessly it's just windows laptops that connect and these need
additional protection/security because Windows also I don't want to
waste a real IP on just one windows box.

--
comp.john