(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> Matthew Shelton wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've been researching the group for an answer, but haven't found the
>> same problem replicated.
>>
>> Here is what I want to accomplish
>>
>> ________________________
>> |Linksys WCG200 |
>> | modem/router |
>> | WAN:<private> |---------------|
>> | LAN: 192.168.1.1/24 | |
>> |_______________________| 192.168.1.0/24
>> | |
>> | |
>> | |
>> | ________|________________
>> | |WinXP |
>> | | desktop |
>> | | eth0:192.168.1.20/24 |
>> | | eth1:<disabled> |
>> | |_______________________|
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> 192.168.1.0/24
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> ________________________
>> |Redhat FC8 |
>> | router |
>> | eth0:192.168.1.2/24 |
>> | gw: 192.168.1.1/24 |
>> | eth1:192.168.2.1/24 |
>> |_______________________|
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> 192.168.2.0/24
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> ________________________
>> |win xp |
>> |laptop |
>> | eth0:192.168.2.20/24 |
>> | gw: 192.168.2.1/24 |
>> | eth1:<wireless> |
>> |_______disabled________|
>>
>>
>> so from the desktop (192.168.1.20), everything works. I can ping the
>> modem/router, both interfaces on the FC8 box, and the laptop, get to
>> internet, etc.
>>
>> The FC8 box can do the same, can ping lo, both networks .2.0 and .1.0,
>> and get to internet.
>>
>> But 192.168.2.20 CANNOT process dns queries, and CANNOT get to
>> internet, (with plain ip address).
>
>
> In your setup , the Linksys must doing NAT also for 192.168.2.0/24 subnet
> if the linksys can't it's must be do by the FC8
>
>
Thanks for the reply...
Can you be a little more specific on how to NAT the addresses? Are you
suggesting that I map the 192.168.2.0 addresses to 192.168.1.0...and
then the linksys router would NAT again, as if they were on the same subnet?
Or something different?
I suppose I could install a proxy on the FC8 box, and squid would take
care organizing the connections, they would be coming out of the
192.168.1.0 network (which has never had any issues). And the linksys
router would NAT them accordingly.
And I'd still be able to keep separate subnets, without NATing.
Anybody see any problem with that?
Thanks again for the insight.
As a quick aside, my real job starts on monday, and today and tomorrow
are probably the last times I'll ever have to retro-fit a home
networking product. Very much looking forward to getting back into the
Cisco IOS.