I have a good connection to the Internet (10mb up and down) at my
house and it is router and motorola wireless access point with 17
wireless clients on it. The system works well but my problem is that
everyone that connects is NATed and goes through only one public
address so if more than one user goes to rapid share at a time then he
has to wait for another user to finish his download! Also some
websites identify the user by their IP address which is always the
same public address! This is causing problems and complaints!
I have a few more static public addresses but how would I give them
to my users? I don't know how to this?
Is there a type of router that will let me use the other addresses I
have different users?
Is there a way that I make all of my internal addresses appear to be
like public addresses? Sure I could do port mapping but I would
really like a way for each address to have its own host info and
identity on the Internet. Sure I could do port mapping and port
forwarding but would like to do better than that.
"Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
news:h5oj15p30dnalbhq1jcfbmtqq5ulomla3r@4ax.com...
>
>
> I have a good connection to the Internet (10mb up and down) at my
> house and it is router and motorola wireless access point with 17
> wireless clients on it. The system works well but my problem is that
> everyone that connects is NATed and goes through only one public
> address so if more than one user goes to rapid share at a time then he
> has to wait for another user to finish his download! Also some
> websites identify the user by their IP address which is always the
> same public address! This is causing problems and complaints!
>
> I have a few more static public addresses but how would I give them
> to my users? I don't know how to this?
>
> Is there a type of router that will let me use the other addresses I
> have different users?
>
> Is there a way that I make all of my internal addresses appear to be
> like public addresses? Sure I could do port mapping but I would
> really like a way for each address to have its own host info and
> identity on the Internet. Sure I could do port mapping and port
> forwarding but would like to do better than that.
>
> Thank you for your time!
if you happen to have several power users, and spare static addresses to
assign just to them, and don't need to do file and print sharing between
those users, you can try settings the properties to use this ip address
instead of checking "obtain an ip address automagically"....
On Wed, 27 May 2009 01:24:57 -0400, "Peter Pan"
<pponvistaNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:
>
>"Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:h5oj15p30dnalbhq1jcfbmtqq5ulomla3r@4ax.com.. .
>>
>>
>> I have a good connection to the Internet (10mb up and down) at my
>> house and it is router and motorola wireless access point with 17
>> wireless clients on it. The system works well but my problem is that
>> everyone that connects is NATed and goes through only one public
>> address so if more than one user goes to rapid share at a time then he
>> has to wait for another user to finish his download! Also some
>> websites identify the user by their IP address which is always the
>> same public address! This is causing problems and complaints!
>>
>> I have a few more static public addresses but how would I give them
>> to my users? I don't know how to this?
>>
>> Is there a type of router that will let me use the other addresses I
>> have different users?
>>
>> Is there a way that I make all of my internal addresses appear to be
>> like public addresses? Sure I could do port mapping but I would
>> really like a way for each address to have its own host info and
>> identity on the Internet. Sure I could do port mapping and port
>> forwarding but would like to do better than that.
>>
>> Thank you for your time!
>
>if you happen to have several power users, and spare static addresses to
>assign just to them, and don't need to do file and print sharing between
>those users, you can try settings the properties to use this ip address
>instead of checking "obtain an ip address automagically"....
Yes that is what I want to do. What router can I buy that will do
both NAT for my internal IP's and not NAT for my publc IP's ???
For example I want my internal IP's to be 10.10.x.x which are NATed
and 215.213.18.x for my static public addresses. With my current
router if I assign a user 215.213.18.x adress it won't work/
"Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
news:p2op15tg6khh7eaurbibs9ijn4c6l8da9l@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 27 May 2009 01:24:57 -0400, "Peter Pan"
> <pponvistaNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:h5oj15p30dnalbhq1jcfbmtqq5ulomla3r@4ax.com. ..
>>>
>>>
>>> I have a good connection to the Internet (10mb up and down) at my
>>> house and it is router and motorola wireless access point with 17
>>> wireless clients on it. The system works well but my problem is that
>>> everyone that connects is NATed and goes through only one public
>>> address so if more than one user goes to rapid share at a time then he
>>> has to wait for another user to finish his download! Also some
>>> websites identify the user by their IP address which is always the
>>> same public address! This is causing problems and complaints!
>>>
>>> I have a few more static public addresses but how would I give them
>>> to my users? I don't know how to this?
>>>
>>> Is there a type of router that will let me use the other addresses I
>>> have different users?
>>>
>>> Is there a way that I make all of my internal addresses appear to be
>>> like public addresses? Sure I could do port mapping but I would
>>> really like a way for each address to have its own host info and
>>> identity on the Internet. Sure I could do port mapping and port
>>> forwarding but would like to do better than that.
>>>
>>> Thank you for your time!
>>
>>if you happen to have several power users, and spare static addresses to
>>assign just to them, and don't need to do file and print sharing between
>>those users, you can try settings the properties to use this ip address
>>instead of checking "obtain an ip address automagically"....
>
>
> Yes that is what I want to do. What router can I buy that will do
> both NAT for my internal IP's and not NAT for my publc IP's ???
>
> For example I want my internal IP's to be 10.10.x.x which are NATed
> and 215.213.18.x for my static public addresses. With my current
> router if I assign a user 215.213.18.x adress it won't work/
>
> Thank you and I really hope someone can help!!
>
> Thank you
are you using vista or xp (or something else) different way to do it for
different operating systems... However, it still may not do what you want...
you will still be subject to the max wireless speed for all users and
lockups when one grabs the wap/router while it does big downloads, and while
your isp may give you 10mbps total for all, that is way less than
54/100/1000 that you will be max/limited to by the router (ie if you use 4
static ip's, you will be limited to max 10 mb combined for all 4, since
thats the max your internet connection supports... ie you won't get 4*10)
it will help the problem with the same people going to the same website and
the same ip address being used, but make no difference in the rapidshare
problem....
if you just want to use different/hidden ip's at different websites, check
out (search/Google) one/several of the no-ip sites (just did a search for no
ip address and got over 23 million hits), and see if any of them have
something
Jack Kipster <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in
news:p2op15tg6khh7eaurbibs9ijn4c6l8da9l@4ax.com:
> On Wed, 27 May 2009 01:24:57 -0400, "Peter Pan"
> <pponvistaNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:h5oj15p30dnalbhq1jcfbmtqq5ulomla3r@4ax.com. ..
>>>
>>>
>>> I have a good connection to the Internet (10mb up and down) at my
>>> house and it is router and motorola wireless access point with 17
>>> wireless clients on it. The system works well but my problem is that
>>> everyone that connects is NATed and goes through only one public
>>> address so if more than one user goes to rapid share at a time then
he
>>> has to wait for another user to finish his download! Also some
>>> websites identify the user by their IP address which is always the
>>> same public address! This is causing problems and complaints!
>>>
>>> I have a few more static public addresses but how would I give them
>>> to my users? I don't know how to this?
>>>
>>> Is there a type of router that will let me use the other addresses I
>>> have different users?
>>>
>>> Is there a way that I make all of my internal addresses appear to be
>>> like public addresses? Sure I could do port mapping but I would
>>> really like a way for each address to have its own host info and
>>> identity on the Internet. Sure I could do port mapping and port
>>> forwarding but would like to do better than that.
>>>
>>> Thank you for your time!
>>
>>if you happen to have several power users, and spare static addresses
to
>>assign just to them, and don't need to do file and print sharing
between
>>those users, you can try settings the properties to use this ip address
>>instead of checking "obtain an ip address automagically"....
>
>
> Yes that is what I want to do. What router can I buy that will do
> both NAT for my internal IP's and not NAT for my publc IP's ???
>
> For example I want my internal IP's to be 10.10.x.x which are NATed
> and 215.213.18.x for my static public addresses. With my current
> router if I assign a user 215.213.18.x adress it won't work/
>
> Thank you and I really hope someone can help!!
>
> Thank you
You're not going to be able to do that with the standard commodity NAT
rtr's.
You *MAY* be able to do it with a Mikrotik-based AP solution, but I have
never needed to do anything like that, so I'm not sure. You could contact
them and ask.
> "Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:p2op15tg6khh7eaurbibs9ijn4c6l8da9l@4ax.com...
>> For example I want my internal IP's to be 10.10.x.x which are NATed
>> and 215.213.18.x for my static public addresses. With my current
>> router if I assign a user 215.213.18.x adress it won't work/
No, because your router is doing NAT, and as such will ignore any traffic
inside that appears to originate from those public IPs. Do they absolutely
need public addresses? You may find that 1:1 NAT does the job just as well,
and they'll be able to still use a private IP to talk to other machines
inside.
>> Thank you and I really hope someone can help!!
What model of router do you have now?
> are you using vista or xp (or something else) different way to do it for
> different operating systems...
He's not asking how to set a static IP address up on his PCs. He's asking
what model of router will do 1:1 NAT or no-NAT for some hosts, and NAT
overload for everyone else.
--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
13:29:09 up 20 days, 16:39, 1 user, load average: 0.12, 0.17, 0.12
A few flakes working together can unleash an avalanche of destruction
On 27 May, 12:21, DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h....@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m>
wrote:
> Jack Kipster <horndo...@aol.com> wrote innews:p2op15tg6khh7eaurbibs9ijn4c6l8da9l@4ax.com:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 27 May 2009 01:24:57 -0400, "Peter Pan"
> > <pponvistaNOS...@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:
>
> >>"Jack Kipster" <horndo...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >>news:h5oj15p30dnalbhq1jcfbmtqq5ulomla3r@4ax.com. ..
>
> >>> I have a few *more static public *addresses but how would I give them
> >>> to my users? *I don't know how to this?
>
> >>> Is there a type of router that will let me use the other addresses I
> >>> have different users?
>
> You're not going to be able to do that with the standard commodity NAT
> rtr's.
You can in principle allocate static internal addresses
to some users and use static NAT for those addresses
and use the original dynamic overloaded NAT for the
remaining users.
No idea what "home" router might support that however
for sure Cisco routers do.
For 10M symmetric connection you might want to
aviod the absolute base models. Especially if doing
firewalling also.
880 might be OK, 1800 definately.
Of course then you need to set it up:-) Until quite recently
they were shipped pretty much dead but they now have
an IP address, DHCP and a web based GUI.
Any professional grade router will support the feature
but I have only used Cisco.
On 25/05/2009 01:18, Jack Kipster wrote:
>
> I have a good connection to the Internet (10mb up and down) at my
> house and it is router and motorola wireless access point with 17
> wireless clients on it. The system works well but my problem is that
> everyone that connects is NATed and goes through only one public
> address so if more than one user goes to rapid share at a time then he
> has to wait for another user to finish his download! Also some
> websites identify the user by their IP address which is always the
> same public address! This is causing problems and complaints!
>
> I have a few more static public addresses but how would I give them
> to my users? I don't know how to this?
>
> Is there a type of router that will let me use the other addresses I
> have different users?
You didn't mention the model of your SDSL modem but Motorola have SDSL
modems that allow "transparent IP mapping"
<http://www.netopia.com/support/hardware/technotes/NQG_042.html>
"Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
news:h5oj15p30dnalbhq1jcfbmtqq5ulomla3r@4ax.com...
>
>
> I have a good connection to the Internet (10mb up and down) at my
> house and it is router and motorola wireless access point with 17
> wireless clients on it.
What kind of Internet connection ? for 10mb up AND down -
sounds like a metro Ethernet product, or some other flavor.
What router and AP are your currently using ?
You have 17 wireless connections at your "house" ?
>The system works well but my problem is that
> everyone that connects is NATed and goes through only one public
> address so if more than one user goes to rapid share at a time then he
> has to wait for another user to finish his download!
A NAT router does just that - maps all users to a single IP address.
BTW - what is "rapid share" ?
>Also some
> websites identify the user by their IP address which is always the
> same public address! This is causing problems and complaints!
Seems odd for a website to do that...
what about all the "dynamic" IP users that access that website ?
I can see it for logging and such - but to "remember" an IP address ?
Guess I've seen some incoming packets
trying to access my systems from "remembered dynamic IP addresses".
> I have a few more static public addresses but how would I give them
> to my users? I don't know how to this?
You almost need 2 routed lans - one for the NAT folks,
and another for your Public IP users...
Not really possible in the normal construct and definitions of consumer
routers.
Might check on the Cisco newsgroup - to see if any version can handle your
scenario.
> Is there a type of router that will let me use the other addresses I
> have different users?
>
> Is there a way that I make all of my internal addresses appear to be
> like public addresses? Sure I could do port mapping but I would
> really like a way for each address to have its own host info and
> identity on the Internet. Sure I could do port mapping and port
> forwarding but would like to do better than that.
>
> Thank you for your time!
On Sun, 31 May 2009 18:39:19 -0500, "ps56k"
<pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote:
>
>"Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:h5oj15p30dnalbhq1jcfbmtqq5ulomla3r@4ax.com.. .
>>
>>
>>The system works well but my problem is that
>> everyone that connects is NATed and goes through only one public
>> address so if more than one user goes to rapid share at a time then he
>> has to wait for another user to finish his download!
>
>A NAT router does just that - maps all users to a single IP address.
>BTW - what is "rapid share" ?
It's a file sharing thing: http://www.rapidshare.com/
Someone uploads a file and multiple people can then download it, but
there can only be one concurrent download per source IP.
>>Also some
>> websites identify the user by their IP address which is always the
>> same public address! This is causing problems and complaints!
>
>Seems odd for a website to do that...
>what about all the "dynamic" IP users that access that website ?
>I can see it for logging and such - but to "remember" an IP address ?
I think they limit each source IP to a single download at a time, so
multiple users sharing a single (NATed) source IP would mean only one
of those people could download at a time and the others would have to
wait. When the first one finishes, one more download would be allowed
to proceed.
"Char Jackson" <none@none.invalid> wrote in message
news:shc6259op8uk016bb21uhsh0eb5hickceq@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 31 May 2009 18:39:19 -0500, "ps56k"
> <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:h5oj15p30dnalbhq1jcfbmtqq5ulomla3r@4ax.com. ..
>>>
>>>
>>>The system works well but my problem is that
>>> everyone that connects is NATed and goes through only one public
>>> address so if more than one user goes to rapid share at a time then he
>>> has to wait for another user to finish his download!
>>
>>A NAT router does just that - maps all users to a single IP address.
>>BTW - what is "rapid share" ?
>
> It's a file sharing thing: http://www.rapidshare.com/
> Someone uploads a file and multiple people can then download it, but
> there can only be one concurrent download per source IP.
>
>>>Also some
>>> websites identify the user by their IP address which is always the
>>> same public address! This is causing problems and complaints!
>>
>>Seems odd for a website to do that...
>>what about all the "dynamic" IP users that access that website ?
>>I can see it for logging and such - but to "remember" an IP address ?
>
> I think they limit each source IP to a single download at a time, so
> multiple users sharing a single (NATed) source IP would mean only one
> of those people could download at a time and the others would have to
> wait. When the first one finishes, one more download would be allowed
> to proceed.
>
> I haven't used it, but that's my understanding.
>
sounds about right - if that is their intent -
gee....
wonder what kind of files are being "uploaded"
and then downloaded by folks...
On Sun, 31 May 2009 22:31:47 -0500, "ps56k"
<pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote:
>
>"Char Jackson" <none@none.invalid> wrote in message
>news:shc6259op8uk016bb21uhsh0eb5hickceq@4ax.com.. .
>> On Sun, 31 May 2009 18:39:19 -0500, "ps56k"
>> <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>news:h5oj15p30dnalbhq1jcfbmtqq5ulomla3r@4ax.com ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The system works well but my problem is that
>>>> everyone that connects is NATed and goes through only one public
>>>> address so if more than one user goes to rapid share at a time then he
>>>> has to wait for another user to finish his download!
>>>
>>>A NAT router does just that - maps all users to a single IP address.
>>>BTW - what is "rapid share" ?
>>
>> It's a file sharing thing: http://www.rapidshare.com/
>> Someone uploads a file and multiple people can then download it, but
>> there can only be one concurrent download per source IP.
>>
>>>>Also some
>>>> websites identify the user by their IP address which is always the
>>>> same public address! This is causing problems and complaints!
>>>
>>>Seems odd for a website to do that...
>>>what about all the "dynamic" IP users that access that website ?
>>>I can see it for logging and such - but to "remember" an IP address ?
>>
>> I think they limit each source IP to a single download at a time, so
>> multiple users sharing a single (NATed) source IP would mean only one
>> of those people could download at a time and the others would have to
>> wait. When the first one finishes, one more download would be allowed
>> to proceed.
>>
>> I haven't used it, but that's my understanding.
>>
>
>sounds about right - if that is their intent -
>gee....
>wonder what kind of files are being "uploaded"
>and then downloaded by folks...
>
Thank you everyone for the input. I am going to try the Cisco
newsgroup for more help.
On Sun, 31 May 2009 18:39:19 -0500, "ps56k"
<pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote:
>
>"Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:h5oj15p30dnalbhq1jcfbmtqq5ulomla3r@4ax.com.. .
>>
>>
>> I have a good connection to the Internet (10mb up and down) at my
>> house and it is router and motorola wireless access point with 17
>> wireless clients on it.
>
>What kind of Internet connection ? for 10mb up AND down -
>sounds like a metro Ethernet product, or some other flavor.
>What router and AP are your currently using ?
>You have 17 wireless connections at your "house" ?
Its a wireless connection from a broadband company that provides
high speed in this area. Speeds are burstable to 100mbps for $300
a month.
>
>>The system works well but my problem is that
>> everyone that connects is NATed and goes through only one public
>> address so if more than one user goes to rapid share at a time then he
>> has to wait for another user to finish his download!
>
>A NAT router does just that - maps all users to a single IP address.
>BTW - what is "rapid share" ?
>
>>Also some
>> websites identify the user by their IP address which is always the
>> same public address! This is causing problems and complaints!
>
>Seems odd for a website to do that...
>what about all the "dynamic" IP users that access that website ?
>I can see it for logging and such - but to "remember" an IP address ?
>Guess I've seen some incoming packets
>trying to access my systems from "remembered dynamic IP addresses".
>
>> I have a few more static public addresses but how would I give them
>> to my users? I don't know how to this?
>
>You almost need 2 routed lans - one for the NAT folks,
>and another for your Public IP users...
>Not really possible in the normal construct and definitions of consumer
>routers.
>Might check on the Cisco newsgroup - to see if any version can handle your
>scenario.
I'm going to check out Cisco but I would think there must be other
routers that can do this also???
I don't like being confined to Cisco. All I really need is a router
that has multiple DHCP servers... one for internal addresses and
another for public addresses.
>
>> Is there a type of router that will let me use the other addresses I
>> have different users?
>>
>> Is there a way that I make all of my internal addresses appear to be
>> like public addresses? Sure I could do port mapping but I would
>> really like a way for each address to have its own host info and
>> identity on the Internet. Sure I could do port mapping and port
>> forwarding but would like to do better than that.
>>
>> Thank you for your time!
>
"Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
news:rnk6251is9tpap8qa4cem8qe9s99rufcgu@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 31 May 2009 18:39:19 -0500, "ps56k"
> <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:h5oj15p30dnalbhq1jcfbmtqq5ulomla3r@4ax.com. ..
>>>
>>>
>>> I have a good connection to the Internet (10mb up and down) at my
>>> house and it is router and motorola wireless access point with 17
>>> wireless clients on it.
>>
>>What kind of Internet connection ? for 10mb up AND down -
>>sounds like a metro Ethernet product, or some other flavor.
>>What router and AP are your currently using ?
>>You have 17 wireless connections at your "house" ?
>
> Its a wireless connection from a broadband company that provides
> high speed in this area. Speeds are burstable to 100mbps for $300
> a month.
>
>
>>
>>>The system works well but my problem is that
>>> everyone that connects is NATed and goes through only one public
>>> address so if more than one user goes to rapid share at a time then he
>>> has to wait for another user to finish his download!
>>
>>A NAT router does just that - maps all users to a single IP address.
>>BTW - what is "rapid share" ?
>>
>>>Also some
>>> websites identify the user by their IP address which is always the
>>> same public address! This is causing problems and complaints!
>>
>>Seems odd for a website to do that...
>>what about all the "dynamic" IP users that access that website ?
>>I can see it for logging and such - but to "remember" an IP address ?
>>Guess I've seen some incoming packets
>>trying to access my systems from "remembered dynamic IP addresses".
>>
>>> I have a few more static public addresses but how would I give them
>>> to my users? I don't know how to this?
>>
>>You almost need 2 routed lans - one for the NAT folks,
>>and another for your Public IP users...
>>Not really possible in the normal construct and definitions of consumer
>>routers.
>>Might check on the Cisco newsgroup - to see if any version can handle your
>>scenario.
>
>
> I'm going to check out Cisco but I would think there must be other
> routers that can do this also???
>
> I don't like being confined to Cisco. All I really need is a router
> that has multiple DHCP servers... one for internal addresses and
> another for public addresses.
>
>>
>>> Is there a type of router that will let me use the other addresses I
>>> have different users?
>>>
>>> Is there a way that I make all of my internal addresses appear to be
>>> like public addresses? Sure I could do port mapping but I would
>>> really like a way for each address to have its own host info and
>>> identity on the Internet. Sure I could do port mapping and port
>>> forwarding but would like to do better than that.
>>>
>>> Thank you for your time!
>>
Are you open to having multiple cheap consumer ap's/ssid's and use the
default gateway to set seperate default dns addresses?
"ps56k" <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote in message
news:FYHUl.31293$YU2.13846@nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
> "Char Jackson" <none@none.invalid> wrote in message
> news:shc6259op8uk016bb21uhsh0eb5hickceq@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 31 May 2009 18:39:19 -0500, "ps56k"
>> <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Jack Kipster" <horndog35@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>news:h5oj15p30dnalbhq1jcfbmtqq5ulomla3r@4ax.com ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The system works well but my problem is that
>>>> everyone that connects is NATed and goes through only one public
>>>> address so if more than one user goes to rapid share at a time then he
>>>> has to wait for another user to finish his download!
>>>
>>>A NAT router does just that - maps all users to a single IP address.
>>>BTW - what is "rapid share" ?
>>
>> It's a file sharing thing: http://www.rapidshare.com/
>> Someone uploads a file and multiple people can then download it, but
>> there can only be one concurrent download per source IP.
>>
>>>>Also some
>>>> websites identify the user by their IP address which is always the
>>>> same public address! This is causing problems and complaints!
>>>
>>>Seems odd for a website to do that...
>>>what about all the "dynamic" IP users that access that website ?
>>>I can see it for logging and such - but to "remember" an IP address ?
>>
>> I think they limit each source IP to a single download at a time, so
>> multiple users sharing a single (NATed) source IP would mean only one
>> of those people could download at a time and the others would have to
>> wait. When the first one finishes, one more download would be allowed
>> to proceed.
>>
>> I haven't used it, but that's my understanding.
>>
>
> sounds about right - if that is their intent -
> gee....
> wonder what kind of files are being "uploaded"
> and then downloaded by folks...
>
since your main focus seems to be the "rapid sharing" website
issue of them using the IP address to restrict concurrent access,
along with having 17 "users" in your "house"....
this seems more and more like a college dorm issue
with people wanting to download "stuff"......
SO - good luck - and doubt you will find an easy way
to use traditional consumer routers that
will operate as both a NAT router AND also somehow support
multiple public IP assigned addresses so you can download even more "stuff".
In article <JfTUl.12154$im1.7885@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>, pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com says...
> >> I think they limit each source IP to a single download at a time, so
> >> multiple users sharing a single (NATed) source IP would mean only one
> >> of those people could download at a time and the others would have to
> >> wait. When the first one finishes, one more download would be allowed
> >> to proceed.
> >>
> >> I haven't used it, but that's my understanding.
> >>
> >
> > sounds about right - if that is their intent -
> > gee....
> > wonder what kind of files are being "uploaded"
> > and then downloaded by folks...
> >
>
> since your main focus seems to be the "rapid sharing" website
> issue of them using the IP address to restrict concurrent access,
> along with having 17 "users" in your "house"....
> this seems more and more like a college dorm issue
> with people wanting to download "stuff"......
>
> SO - good luck - and doubt you will find an easy way
> to use traditional consumer routers that
> will operate as both a NAT router AND also somehow support
> multiple public IP assigned addresses so you can download even more "stuff".
Anybody taking odds on this? My bet is on homework (or possibly test)
answers...
--
/~\ The ASCII
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML
/ \ Email!
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).
On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:55:50 -0400, David Kerber
<ns_dkerber@ns_WarrenRogersAssociates.com> wrote:
>In article <JfTUl.12154$im1.7885@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>,
>pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com says...
>> >> I think they limit each source IP to a single download at a time, so
>> >> multiple users sharing a single (NATed) source IP would mean only one
>> >> of those people could download at a time and the others would have to
>> >> wait. When the first one finishes, one more download would be allowed
>> >> to proceed.
>> >>
>> >> I haven't used it, but that's my understanding.
>> >>
>> >
>> > sounds about right - if that is their intent -
>> > gee....
>> > wonder what kind of files are being "uploaded"
>> > and then downloaded by folks...
>> >
>>
>> since your main focus seems to be the "rapid sharing" website
>> issue of them using the IP address to restrict concurrent access,
>> along with having 17 "users" in your "house"....
>> this seems more and more like a college dorm issue
>> with people wanting to download "stuff"......
>>
>> SO - good luck - and doubt you will find an easy way
>> to use traditional consumer routers that
>> will operate as both a NAT router AND also somehow support
>> multiple public IP assigned addresses so you can download even more "stuff".
>
>Anybody taking odds on this? My bet is on homework (or possibly test)
>answers...
When I heard rapidshare mentioned, my first thought was along the same
lines as ps56k. *shrug*
Char Jackson wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:55:50 -0400, David Kerber
> <ns_dkerber@ns_WarrenRogersAssociates.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <JfTUl.12154$im1.7885@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>,
>> pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com says...
>>>>> I think they limit each source IP to a single download at a time, so
>>>>> multiple users sharing a single (NATed) source IP would mean only one
>>>>> of those people could download at a time and the others would have to
>>>>> wait. When the first one finishes, one more download would be allowed
>>>>> to proceed.
>>>>>
>>>>> I haven't used it, but that's my understanding.
>>>>>
>>>> sounds about right - if that is their intent -
>>>> gee....
>>>> wonder what kind of files are being "uploaded"
>>>> and then downloaded by folks...
>>>>
>>> since your main focus seems to be the "rapid sharing" website
>>> issue of them using the IP address to restrict concurrent access,
>>> along with having 17 "users" in your "house"....
>>> this seems more and more like a college dorm issue
>>> with people wanting to download "stuff"......
>>>
>>> SO - good luck - and doubt you will find an easy way
>>> to use traditional consumer routers that
>>> will operate as both a NAT router AND also somehow support
>>> multiple public IP assigned addresses so you can download even more "stuff".
Rapidshare allows free downloads from the same IP address every 15
minutes, unless you pay for a premium account, which allows you
unlimited uploads and downloads.
> Are you open to having multiple cheap consumer ap's/ssid's and use the
> default gateway to set seperate default dns addresses?
dd-wrt will let you assign different SSIDs to different VLANs, negating the
need for multiple IPs.
--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
18:55:05 up 26 days, 22:52, 1 user, load average: 0.13, 0.13, 0.09
A few flakes working together can unleash an avalanche of destruction
> On Sun, 31 May 2009 18:39:19 -0500, "ps56k"
> <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote:
>>You almost need 2 routed lans - one for the NAT folks,
>>and another for your Public IP users...
>>Not really possible in the normal construct and definitions of consumer
>>routers.
I would be interested to hear what the definition of a consumer router is.
> I'm going to check out Cisco but I would think there must be other
> routers that can do this also???
>
> I don't like being confined to Cisco. All I really need is a router
> that has multiple DHCP servers... one for internal addresses and
> another for public addresses.
Your life would be easier if you stuck to one LAN subnet, used static DHCP
assignments for machines that need their own public IP, and 1:1 NAT to/from
them.
Also has L7filter which will let you manage P2P traffic. You could probably
run Ntop on it as well, which is a great real-time traffic monitor [ie it'll
let you see who's hammering the internet connection].
Some of the above will run on an embedded router, some require a PC with
multiple NICs. The router based ones will probably struggle to deliver 100M
throughput.
Sonicwalls support 1:1 NAT.
--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
19:00:44 up 26 days, 22:58, 1 user, load average: 0.35, 0.20, 0.11
A few flakes working together can unleash an avalanche of destruction
> dd-wrt will let you assign different SSIDs to different VLANs, negating
> the need for multiple IPs.
I meant APs, not IPs.
--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
20:30:49 up 27 days, 29 min, 1 user, load average: 0.21, 0.14, 0.12
A few flakes working together can unleash an avalanche of destruction
"alexd" <troffasky@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2143178.e9J7NaK4W3@ale.cx...
> Peter Pan wrote:
>
>> Are you open to having multiple cheap consumer ap's/ssid's and use the
>> default gateway to set seperate default dns addresses?
>
> dd-wrt will let you assign different SSIDs to different VLANs, negating
> the
> need for multiple IPs.
>
> --
> <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
> 18:55:05 up 26 days, 22:52, 1 user, load average: 0.13, 0.13, 0.09
> A few flakes working together can unleash an avalanche of destruction
>
>
not multiples per se, not sure what dd-wrt does (i dont use it)... i have
several wap's daisy chained (with different ssid's) off the main wap/router,
and on each computer in the profiles when connected to a wap, use these
settings instead of get an ip address automagically (i happen to use
different ip addresses for different connections, some of the gaming, tivo,
and p2p connections use the other ip addresses exclusivly, i just have
PPinMD1 thru PPinMD4 ssids and connect to a specific ssid (( PP= Peter Pan
and MD = Maryland)) when i want to use a specific ip address, by doing it
that way, still lets me share devices on the network ((same subnet, other
puters, print sharing etc)) but makes certain users(by ssid) use certain ip
addresses)
i just happened to have some old (cheap consumer wap/routers) in my junk
box, so i gave it a shot, seems to work....
"David Kerber" <ns_dkerber@ns_WarrenRogersAssociates.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.248dd21f3edaf584989d18@news.conversent.ne t...
> In article <JfTUl.12154$im1.7885@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>,
> pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com says...
>> >> I think they limit each source IP to a single download at a time, so
>> >> multiple users sharing a single (NATed) source IP would mean only one
>> >> of those people could download at a time and the others would have to
>> >> wait. When the first one finishes, one more download would be allowed
>> >> to proceed.
>> >>
>> >> I haven't used it, but that's my understanding.
>> >>
>> >
>> > sounds about right - if that is their intent -
>> > gee....
>> > wonder what kind of files are being "uploaded"
>> > and then downloaded by folks...
>> >
>>
>> since your main focus seems to be the "rapid sharing" website
>> issue of them using the IP address to restrict concurrent access,
>> along with having 17 "users" in your "house"....
>> this seems more and more like a college dorm issue
>> with people wanting to download "stuff"......
>>
>> SO - good luck - and doubt you will find an easy way
>> to use traditional consumer routers that
>> will operate as both a NAT router AND also somehow support
>> multiple public IP assigned addresses so you can download even more
>> "stuff".
>
> Anybody taking odds on this? My bet is on homework (or possibly test)
> answers...
>
> --
yeah - and his "horndog" email address is a nice touch also....
thinking maybe bigger stuff - with an internal 10mb link (sounds campus wide
ethernet)
and only 1 person at a time can download..... it would have to be a HUGE
file -
like maybe a "shared" HD movie :)
"alexd" <troffasky@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3472202.yArG6xLiZA@ale.cx...
> Jack Kipster wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 31 May 2009 18:39:19 -0500, "ps56k"
>> <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote:
>
>>>You almost need 2 routed lans - one for the NAT folks,
>>>and another for your Public IP users...
>>>Not really possible in the normal construct and definitions of consumer
>>>routers.
>
> I would be interested to hear what the definition of a consumer router is.
>
>> I'm going to check out Cisco but I would think there must be other
>> routers that can do this also???
>>
>> I don't like being confined to Cisco. All I really need is a router
>> that has multiple DHCP servers... one for internal addresses and
>> another for public addresses.
>
> Your life would be easier if you stuck to one LAN subnet, used static DHCP
> assignments for machines that need their own public IP, and 1:1 NAT
> to/from
> them.
>
> m0n0wall supports 1:1 NAT:
>
> http://doc.m0n0.ch/handbook/examples.html
>
> pfSense supports 1:1 NAT:
>
> http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?a...;topic=15360.0
>
> dd-wrt supports 1:1 NAT:
>
> http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/One-to-one_NAT
>
> Tomato/MLPPP supports 1:1 NAT:
>
> http://fixppp.org/
>
> Zeroshell suports 1:1 NAT:
>
> http://www.zeroshell.net/listing/1_1..._ZeroShell.pdf
>
> Also has L7filter which will let you manage P2P traffic. You could
> probably
> run Ntop on it as well, which is a great real-time traffic monitor [ie
> it'll
> let you see who's hammering the internet connection].
>
> Some of the above will run on an embedded router, some require a PC with
> multiple NICs. The router based ones will probably struggle to deliver
> 100M
> throughput.
>
> Sonicwalls support 1:1 NAT.
>
> --
> <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
> 19:00:44 up 26 days, 22:58, 1 user, load average: 0.35, 0.20, 0.11
> A few flakes working together can unleash an avalanche of destruction
>
Had not thought along the lines of the DMZ and NAT 1:1
This whole scenario is based on the need for multiple external, WAN, IP
addresses
being mapped to the internal folks..... either explicit/static or dynamic -
The main users appear to be downloading "stuff" from a file sharing website
that logs the IP address, and only allows a single user download per IP
address.
SO - when using traditional NAT with a single dynamic WAN address
the users are restricted to only one user at a time.... hence the need for
multiple external addresses.
In summary - do any of the mainstream consumer off the shelf routers/WAPs
like say the Linksys, Netgear, Dlink products
offer NAT 1:1 as a selection vs just the DMZ mapping ?
Actually I have a 100mb connection that is burstable to 1 Gbps at my
friend's data center. In the cabinet is a small router and one
cablefrom it runs to the roof to an 11 GHz link that uses two Trango
Apex bridges. My friend has given me public IP's to use but all I have
are internal addresses from my router and I need a router that will
allow me to assign the ethernet port so it will route but internal and
publc addresses?
The 17 users are my friends that I have around the county who love the
high speed connections. I am going to keep asking around to find
the router that will give me the solution I need.
It's much more than rapidshare, I need to be able to give public IP's
to friends that need it. I can't have everyone behind one public
address nor can I get another 11 GHz microwave link for each of them.
Thank you for all of your assistance,
Jack Kipster
fellow wireless enthusiasts
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 15:22:59 -0500, "ps56k"
<pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote:
>
>"alexd" <troffasky@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:3472202.yArG6xLiZA@ale.cx...
>> Jack Kipster wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 31 May 2009 18:39:19 -0500, "ps56k"
>>> <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>You almost need 2 routed lans - one for the NAT folks,
>>>>and another for your Public IP users...
>>>>Not really possible in the normal construct and definitions of consumer
>>>>routers.
>>
>> I would be interested to hear what the definition of a consumer router is.
>>
>>> I'm going to check out Cisco but I would think there must be other
>>> routers that can do this also???
>>>
>>> I don't like being confined to Cisco. All I really need is a router
>>> that has multiple DHCP servers... one for internal addresses and
>>> another for public addresses.
>>
>> Your life would be easier if you stuck to one LAN subnet, used static DHCP
>> assignments for machines that need their own public IP, and 1:1 NAT
>> to/from
>> them.
>>
>> m0n0wall supports 1:1 NAT:
>>
>> http://doc.m0n0.ch/handbook/examples.html
>>
>> pfSense supports 1:1 NAT:
>>
>> http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?a...;topic=15360.0
>>
>> dd-wrt supports 1:1 NAT:
>>
>> http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/One-to-one_NAT
>>
>> Tomato/MLPPP supports 1:1 NAT:
>>
>> http://fixppp.org/
>>
>> Zeroshell suports 1:1 NAT:
>>
>> http://www.zeroshell.net/listing/1_1..._ZeroShell.pdf
>>
>> Also has L7filter which will let you manage P2P traffic. You could
>> probably
>> run Ntop on it as well, which is a great real-time traffic monitor [ie
>> it'll
>> let you see who's hammering the internet connection].
>>
>> Some of the above will run on an embedded router, some require a PC with
>> multiple NICs. The router based ones will probably struggle to deliver
>> 100M
>> throughput.
>>
>> Sonicwalls support 1:1 NAT.
>>
>> --
>> <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
>> 19:00:44 up 26 days, 22:58, 1 user, load average: 0.35, 0.20, 0.11
>> A few flakes working together can unleash an avalanche of destruction
>>
>
>Had not thought along the lines of the DMZ and NAT 1:1
>
>This whole scenario is based on the need for multiple external, WAN, IP
>addresses
>being mapped to the internal folks..... either explicit/static or dynamic -
>
>The main users appear to be downloading "stuff" from a file sharing website
>that logs the IP address, and only allows a single user download per IP
>address.
>
>SO - when using traditional NAT with a single dynamic WAN address
>the users are restricted to only one user at a time.... hence the need for
>multiple external addresses.
>
>In summary - do any of the mainstream consumer off the shelf routers/WAPs
>like say the Linksys, Netgear, Dlink products
>offer NAT 1:1 as a selection vs just the DMZ mapping ?
>
Problem with NAT (Help!) 
Linear Mode
