how to use more than on of my static IP's?

I have an internet connection that gives me 12 static IP's but I can
only figure out how to use one of them. There is only one connection to the
box from the provider. I would like to use one of the IP's for a 192.168.1.x
range and another for a 192.168.2.x and maybe another for a 10.x.x.x range.
See what I mean?
Now I would imagine a "router" would be used to split the different IP's
out but at another location I have a cisco 2600 connected to a T1 and with
it I have only seen how to configure the serial (WAN?) port for a single IP
also.
What basic bit of info am I missing that would open this door to the
other IP's? Do I have to hub the ISP's connection and then run the hub to
different physical networks? I thouht I could have several different ranges
of IP addresses on a single set of wires. Maybe the cisco will also do this
but how do I start?

What machine is directly connected to the Internet? If it is W2k/2003
server, you can allocate your pool of registered IP addresses in RRAS/NAT.
You can then map some or all of them to internal private IP addresses.

"mmac" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I have an internet connection that gives me 12 static IP's but I can
> only figure out how to use one of them. There is only one connection to
> the box from the provider. I would like to use one of the IP's for a
> 192.168.1.x range and another for a 192.168.2.x and maybe another for a
> 10.x.x.x range. See what I mean?
> Now I would imagine a "router" would be used to split the different
> IP's out but at another location I have a cisco 2600 connected to a T1 and
> with it I have only seen how to configure the serial (WAN?) port for a
> single IP also.
> What basic bit of info am I missing that would open this door to the
> other IP's? Do I have to hub the ISP's connection and then run the hub to
> different physical networks? I thouht I could have several different
> ranges of IP addresses on a single set of wires. Maybe the cisco will also
> do this but how do I start?
>

None are directly connected, all are behind a firewall, I have set port
"redirection" to certain machines.
For example, port 3379 of the WAN IP is set to go to the DC server for
terminal service access from anywhere. To reach another machine with TS I
have to first connect to the server, USe the web interface onthe server to
go into the firewall and change the machine that port 3379 is directed to,
which of course disconnects me when applied.
Then when I reconnect to the same WAN IP with TS, I connect to the
machine I set up just moments ago. But that leaves the first machine locked
out to all but admins because I didn't leave the Remote desktop connection
gracefully, I was yanked off when I changed the firewall setting.
It works but it's a bit clunky. I would rather have another of my 12 WAN
IP's go to a different machine. But the Netgear FVS318 doesn't allow for mre
than one WAN IP. And at another location I have a Cisco 2600 router and I
don't think I can configure it for more that one WAN IP either.


"Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> What machine is directly connected to the Internet? If it is W2k/2003
> server, you can allocate your pool of registered IP addresses in RRAS/NAT.
> You can then map some or all of them to internal private IP addresses.
>
> "mmac" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> I have an internet connection that gives me 12 static IP's but I can
>> only figure out how to use one of them. There is only one connection to
>> the box from the provider. I would like to use one of the IP's for a
>> 192.168.1.x range and another for a 192.168.2.x and maybe another for a
>> 10.x.x.x range. See what I mean?
>> Now I would imagine a "router" would be used to split the different
>> IP's out but at another location I have a cisco 2600 connected to a T1
>> and with it I have only seen how to configure the serial (WAN?) port for
>> a single IP also.
>> What basic bit of info am I missing that would open this door to the
>> other IP's? Do I have to hub the ISP's connection and then run the hub to
>> different physical networks? I thouht I could have several different
>> ranges of IP addresses on a single set of wires. Maybe the cisco will
>> also do this but how do I start?
>>
>
>

Address mapping and port forwarding are two quite different processes.

With address mapping, all traffic arriving at the router addressed to a
particular public IP is sent on to the corresponding private IP. With port
forwarding, only traffic on a particular port is forwarded to the private
IP. To do what you want, the router directly connected to the Internet needs
to support address mapping.

"mmac" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> None are directly connected, all are behind a firewall, I have set port
> "redirection" to certain machines.
> For example, port 3379 of the WAN IP is set to go to the DC server for
> terminal service access from anywhere. To reach another machine with TS I
> have to first connect to the server, USe the web interface onthe server to
> go into the firewall and change the machine that port 3379 is directed to,
> which of course disconnects me when applied.
> Then when I reconnect to the same WAN IP with TS, I connect to the
> machine I set up just moments ago. But that leaves the first machine
> locked out to all but admins because I didn't leave the Remote desktop
> connection gracefully, I was yanked off when I changed the firewall
> setting.
> It works but it's a bit clunky. I would rather have another of my 12
> WAN IP's go to a different machine. But the Netgear FVS318 doesn't allow
> for mre than one WAN IP. And at another location I have a Cisco 2600
> router and I don't think I can configure it for more that one WAN IP
> either.
>
>
> "Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> What machine is directly connected to the Internet? If it is W2k/2003
>> server, you can allocate your pool of registered IP addresses in
>> RRAS/NAT. You can then map some or all of them to internal private IP
>> addresses.
>>
>> "mmac" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> I have an internet connection that gives me 12 static IP's but I can
>>> only figure out how to use one of them. There is only one connection to
>>> the box from the provider. I would like to use one of the IP's for a
>>> 192.168.1.x range and another for a 192.168.2.x and maybe another for a
>>> 10.x.x.x range. See what I mean?
>>> Now I would imagine a "router" would be used to split the different
>>> IP's out but at another location I have a cisco 2600 connected to a T1
>>> and with it I have only seen how to configure the serial (WAN?) port for
>>> a single IP also.
>>> What basic bit of info am I missing that would open this door to the
>>> other IP's? Do I have to hub the ISP's connection and then run the hub
>>> to different physical networks? I thouht I could have several different
>>> ranges of IP addresses on a single set of wires. Maybe the cisco will
>>> also do this but how do I start?
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Thank you, I'll go learn about address mapping now.
I would imagine that the SOHO line of routers wont support address mapping?

"Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Address mapping and port forwarding are two quite different processes.
>
> With address mapping, all traffic arriving at the router addressed to a
> particular public IP is sent on to the corresponding private IP. With port
> forwarding, only traffic on a particular port is forwarded to the private
> IP. To do what you want, the router directly connected to the Internet
> needs to support address mapping.
>
> "mmac" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> None are directly connected, all are behind a firewall, I have set
>> port "redirection" to certain machines.
>> For example, port 3379 of the WAN IP is set to go to the DC server for
>> terminal service access from anywhere. To reach another machine with TS I
>> have to first connect to the server, USe the web interface onthe server
>> to go into the firewall and change the machine that port 3379 is directed
>> to, which of course disconnects me when applied.
>> Then when I reconnect to the same WAN IP with TS, I connect to the
>> machine I set up just moments ago. But that leaves the first machine
>> locked out to all but admins because I didn't leave the Remote desktop
>> connection gracefully, I was yanked off when I changed the firewall
>> setting.
>> It works but it's a bit clunky. I would rather have another of my 12
>> WAN IP's go to a different machine. But the Netgear FVS318 doesn't allow
>> for mre than one WAN IP. And at another location I have a Cisco 2600
>> router and I don't think I can configure it for more that one WAN IP
>> either.
>>
>>
>> "Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> What machine is directly connected to the Internet? If it is W2k/2003
>>> server, you can allocate your pool of registered IP addresses in
>>> RRAS/NAT. You can then map some or all of them to internal private IP
>>> addresses.
>>>
>>> "mmac" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> I have an internet connection that gives me 12 static IP's but I can
>>>> only figure out how to use one of them. There is only one connection to
>>>> the box from the provider. I would like to use one of the IP's for a
>>>> 192.168.1.x range and another for a 192.168.2.x and maybe another for a
>>>> 10.x.x.x range. See what I mean?
>>>> Now I would imagine a "router" would be used to split the different
>>>> IP's out but at another location I have a cisco 2600 connected to a T1
>>>> and with it I have only seen how to configure the serial (WAN?) port
>>>> for a single IP also.
>>>> What basic bit of info am I missing that would open this door to the
>>>> other IP's? Do I have to hub the ISP's connection and then run the hub
>>>> to different physical networks? I thouht I could have several different
>>>> ranges of IP addresses on a single set of wires. Maybe the cisco will
>>>> also do this but how do I start?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Guys,...

In the first post I tought I saw it stated that there is a T1 line with a
Cisco 2600 series router. This is altogether different than a DSL/Cable
setup. The User's side of the 2600 uses one of the 12 addresses,..the
Firewall mentioned should use one more of those which leaves 10. There
should be a Hub or Switched placed between the Firewall and the 2600,..this
is where any machines would be plugged into if they are to use any of those
remaining 10 addresses.

If any of these intended addresses are intended to be used to access
machines behind the Firewall, the any addition IP#s would be added to the
external Interface of the Firewall and would then use either Static NAT or
maybe One-to-One NAT (less desireable) to publish the internal machines to
the exteranl side with those IP#s.

We have 32 addresses while using a T1 and a Cisco2501. There is an old 12
port 3Com hub between the 2501 and the Proxy. This is where I connect any of
our machines and equipment that uses Public IP#s.

--

Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com

I think I'm getting it...
The device serving my network (fractional T1 through a "Vina" box) is in
"bridge mode", If I understand you right, that means to me that I can remove
it from the equation, does that also mean that I can just put a hub to it
and hang multiple firewalls/routers off that hub giving me my multiple IP's?
and then I can hub them back to a single wire for transport?
You say there is a difference between DSL and T1 setup, can you
elaborate there? I know you would need a modem for the DSL signal and that
would probably have to be something different and provided by the dsl
provider, but after that what is different? I have a DSL with 5 static IP's
as well and if I work this out I may move on to that one.


"Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Guys,...
>
> In the first post I tought I saw it stated that there is a T1 line with a
> Cisco 2600 series router. This is altogether different than a DSL/Cable
> setup. The User's side of the 2600 uses one of the 12 addresses,..the
> Firewall mentioned should use one more of those which leaves 10. There
> should be a Hub or Switched placed between the Firewall and the
> 2600,..this
> is where any machines would be plugged into if they are to use any of
> those
> remaining 10 addresses.
>
> If any of these intended addresses are intended to be used to access
> machines behind the Firewall, the any addition IP#s would be added to the
> external Interface of the Firewall and would then use either Static NAT or
> maybe One-to-One NAT (less desireable) to publish the internal machines to
> the exteranl side with those IP#s.
>
> We have 32 addresses while using a T1 and a Cisco2501. There is an old 12
> port 3Com hub between the 2501 and the Proxy. This is where I connect any
> of
> our machines and equipment that uses Public IP#s.
>
> --
>
> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> www.wandtv.com
>
>

"mmac" <lost@sea> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I think I'm getting it...
> The device serving my network (fractional T1 through a "Vina" box) is
in
> "bridge mode", If I understand you right, that means to me that I can
remove
> it from the equation,

No.

> does that also mean that I can just put a hub to it
> and hang multiple firewalls/routers off that hub giving me my multiple
IP's?
> and then I can hub them back to a single wire for transport?

No.

> You say there is a difference between DSL and T1 setup, can you
> elaborate there? I know you would need a modem for the DSL signal and that

I had this big three or four page message typed up, then I gave up, and then
decided there really is no way I can explain clear enough what the
difference is between the two by using a newgroup message,....so I deleted
it. Maybe Bill can have you going in the right direction.

--

Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com

well, thanks for the effort anyway.

"Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "mmac" <lost@sea> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> I think I'm getting it...
>> The device serving my network (fractional T1 through a "Vina" box) is
> in
>> "bridge mode", If I understand you right, that means to me that I can
> remove
>> it from the equation,
>
> No.
>
>> does that also mean that I can just put a hub to it
>> and hang multiple firewalls/routers off that hub giving me my multiple
> IP's?
>> and then I can hub them back to a single wire for transport?
>
> No.
>
>> You say there is a difference between DSL and T1 setup, can you
>> elaborate there? I know you would need a modem for the DSL signal and
>> that
>
> I had this big three or four page message typed up, then I gave up, and
> then
> decided there really is no way I can explain clear enough what the
> difference is between the two by using a newgroup message,....so I deleted
> it. Maybe Bill can have you going in the right direction.
>
> --
>
> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> www.wandtv.com
>
>

Afraid I have to agree with Phillip. A newsgroup isn't really the place
for a crash course in networking. There is a point where you just have to
hit the books and build up enough background to ask specific questions.

"mmac" <lost@sea> wrote in message
news:Ov$(E-Mail Removed)...
> well, thanks for the effort anyway.
>
> "Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>> "mmac" <lost@sea> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> I think I'm getting it...
>>> The device serving my network (fractional T1 through a "Vina" box)
>>> is
>> in
>>> "bridge mode", If I understand you right, that means to me that I can
>> remove
>>> it from the equation,
>>
>> No.
>>
>>> does that also mean that I can just put a hub to it
>>> and hang multiple firewalls/routers off that hub giving me my multiple
>> IP's?
>>> and then I can hub them back to a single wire for transport?
>>
>> No.
>>
>>> You say there is a difference between DSL and T1 setup, can you
>>> elaborate there? I know you would need a modem for the DSL signal and
>>> that
>>
>> I had this big three or four page message typed up, then I gave up, and
>> then
>> decided there really is no way I can explain clear enough what the
>> difference is between the two by using a newgroup message,....so I
>> deleted
>> it. Maybe Bill can have you going in the right direction.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
>> www.wandtv.com
>>
>>
>
>