On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 12:13:00 +0000, Gordon Henderson wrote:
> In article <4a5c51a1$0$2543$(E-Mail Removed)>, R Johnson
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:22:20 +0000, Gordon Henderson wrote:
>>
>>> In article <4a5c3f3e$0$2530$(E-Mail Removed)>, R Johnson
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>Any Draytek experts here?
>>>>
>>>>I'm told the 2800 series can do NAT and ROUTED at the same time. Say
>>>>for a block of 8 IP's you can assign one to be natted and route the
>>>>others through. Is this correct? Are there alternatives to Draytek for
>>>>this (Other than megabuck Cisco's)
>>>
>>> The internal side of things can have 2 IP addresses/ranges. One can be
>>> the routed subnet and the other NATted (with the NATted devices
>>> presenting the routers own external IP address.
>>>
>>> I've only tried this once though - much prefer to use a 2nd router
>>> doing NAT. The early Drayteks have NAT issues (2600's - not sure about
>>> the 2800's I currently use 2820's)
>>>
>>>>Also what is the difference between the 2800, 2800g and 2800v. I see
>>>>these coming up cheaply now and can't find the information.
>>>
>>> with all Drayteks:
>>>
>>> modelNum: basic,
>>> modelNum+g: Wi-Fi 802.11g
>>> modelNum+v: built=in 2-port ATA for VoIP.
>>>
>>> modelnum+gv - both VoIP and Wi-Fi.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure the difference between the 2800 and the 2820's though.
>>> The 2800 I way yesterday was in the same blue case the 2600 came in -
>>> maybe it's jsut software. I think the 2820's have hardware crypto to
>>> make VPNs run faster... I had speed and jitter problems some time back
>>> with the crypto VPNs on the 2600's and 2900's...
>>>
>>> Gordon
>>
>>I'm glad it was you than answered Gordon :-) I just knew that you would
>>know. Thanks.
>>
>>What I want to do - and in all my years I've never needed to get
>>involved in the network side of this as such - is set up a small 8 block
>>so that one of the addresses nats a soho network for ten user, one of
>>the others would go straight to the public IP on a secondary box. Looks
>>like this will do just as I need without having to set up shed loads of
>>additional hardware.
>
> It should do what you need, but personally, I'd be tempted to stick in a
> 2nd router (a 'cable' one with Ethernet ports). That way you can pick
> the IP address used for the NATted LAN, otherwise it will be the one
> assigned to the Draytek (which you may not have any control over).
>
> E.g. my setup - I have 8 IPs from .104 through .111. My router (an older
> 2600) has .105 and this was fixed by the ISP. 104 and 111 are the
> (unusable) broadcast addresses.
>
> So it looks like:
>
> -BT-Phone-ADSL-
> |
> 2600 .105
> |
> +------------+-----------+--------------+ | |
> | |
> Server.106 Server.107 Server.108 Router.110
> | NAT 192.168.x.y/24
> |
> +-----------+--------+--------+
> | | | |
> Worksation Server Laptop Phone
>
> The external servers are in the "DMZ". It physically separates internal
> LAN traffic from the external LAN, so if a server were to be
> compromised, it still can't get access through the Router.110 into the
> LAN and other servers.
>
> The Draytek 2600.105 doesn't do any NAT at all - that's handled by the
> Rotuer.110.
>
> Gordon
I've got a old 50p eBay Edimax cable router here that will probably do
that just fine - redrawn to:
> -BT-Phone-ADSL-
> |
> 2600 .105
> |
> +------------+-----------+
> | | |
> MAIL SERVER SNORT BOX EDIMAX {or SWITCH}
> | NAT 192.168.x.y/24
> |
> +-----------+--------+--------+
> | | | |
> WS 1 W/L AP Laptop Phone
You are a star GH. Always a first class contributor to U/N. Thank you.
|
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
