"trouble" === evolution, not creative Thinking.
I don't buy your concern.
Your are posting to so many groups, what is not netiquette.
A memory sharing among different systems can only exist.when
those points are known to systems' handshaking.
-------------------------
"for example using the ScriptomaticV2 tool"
--------------------------
You likely can not manage your server, what is vital here.
Then all this asking for "more" workarounds".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
"Static NAT translates" ...
That is your ISP and hardware allowing you to do things or not.
Have they "recently" exchanged something?
Oh man what planet do you live on.
You must even on the internet simplify, aggregate, and "compress" already.
Start with the number of newsgroups you have had in your post field.
-------------------------
Suppose your default sever is win 2003.
Have you never wondered why there is this confusion
on "release candidates" over actual implementation and
"going support" in e.g. this group.
"Sergio" <ciao> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Dear all,
>
> this is my scenario
>
> I need to manage some servers in the remote offices. I have a cisco
> pix-firewall
> and also the remote networks have it.
>
> A remote server ( I will call it MYSERVER ) is reachabled with the
> Public address 81.81.81.43 (eg.) , on the inside lan MYSERVER adress is
> 192.x.x.x. ( ie a private address) so a Static NAT translates the ip to
> private and viceversa.
>
> my computer is in the inside lan with a private address and goes out with
a
> public address like 82.83.84.56 (eg).
>
> the server is in the same domain as the mine.
>
> I'm an Enterprise Admin.
>
> If i try to connect to this server with a wmi script, for example using
the
> ScriptomaticV2 tool, I can't get the data.
>
> But if I add to MYSERVER the ip alias 81.81.81.43 ( the same address
> with it is pubblished) i can get all data, but that's a terrible
> workaround!!!
>
> Wich is the best solution to avoid this kind of problem?
>
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Sergio
>
>
|