On Tuesday 07 October 2003 07:21 am, Luke Kearney wrote: > Thanks for your response. It may well be that I end up doing exactly > that to fix this issue in the short term. But there are some internal > resources that I don't want to have live IP's so I am trying for the > workable NAT solution. > > Regards, > > LukeK > > > On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 07:20:15 -0500 > > "Minnesota Slinky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> granted us these pearls of wisdom: > > Why bother doing nat? You *could* just setup a DHCP server on the > > gateway for the remaining IP address and when the other 14 machines came > > online, they could dynamically pull the IP addy. Just set some very > > strict rules on the incoming packets to the rest of the internal > > network. This is a similar thing to what I did when I had an 8-block > > from Qwest a couple years ago. > > > > HTH > > > > Eric F Crist > > AdTech Integrated Systems, Inc > > (952) 403-9000
Do you mind if I ask you to elaborate on the configuration of your network and which services you don't want accessed? -- Eric F Crist AdTech Integrated Systems, Inc (952) 403-9000
pgp00000.pgp
Description: signature
