Ok, that makes sense. If you want to go the Linux route (sorry about the pun!) you might want to look at Shorewall. Its what I use here on the Bridge/Firewall at Carr Hill.
http://www.shorewall.net/
Printable View
Ok, that makes sense. If you want to go the Linux route (sorry about the pun!) you might want to look at Shorewall. Its what I use here on the Bridge/Firewall at Carr Hill.
http://www.shorewall.net/
Sorry - I be stoopid there - of course using nat I have a practically unlimited no. of IP's available on a single range! - I often forget the obvious :oops:Quote:
Originally Posted by mark
Hi Mark.
We had an admin network IP range that only allowed for 124 clients (and after using most for printers and servers etc effectively had a lot less than that to use). EMBC (our broadband provider) wouldn't give us anymore but recommended that we use a small NAT device from NetGear (or whoever else we wanted to get one from) and take one of our 124 addresses and assign that to the WAN port. We could then use any private range we like internally to give as many addresses as we needed to internal systems and other devices.
I used 192.168.x.x and we can now have up to 254 clients with static IP addresses- whilst using only one of our 124 routable public addresses. Neat. And it works really well!
We currently have about 150 admin systems running through the NAT box at any one time- remembering of course they only do this when they want an external (internet) connection. It's pretty fast too. To help, I connected the NAT box directly into our core switch, so that helps a little. As from next week however, we are going to reaching nearly 220 connections to the NAT box, so time will tell whether this is a workable solution. Apparently EMBC know of many schools with this arrangement and they use the following model or a derivative of it:
http://www.netgear.co.uk/firewall_ro...pn_tunnels.php
All I can say is, "it works". And well enough for admin use. If you have many more intended connections through the NAT box, i.e. curriculum internet use, then you will need a bit more serious equipment. Hopefully this answer will help you a little though.
If you decide it will fit the bill and you need any more help let me know and I'll be only too happy to help you out.
Take care,
Paul
Thanks very much for that Kingswood. The price of those netgear boxes are certainly attractive! Dunno if I could stand the sneers from Nathan with his flashy firebox - but if it does the job...
Plus you could have two of those and i'd still be half the price of the watchguard!
Ah! - it's all too damn confusing! :)
Just like me then tony :)Quote:
Originally Posted by GrumbleDook
what WG unit have you got and how many clients/users/etc. have you got attached to it?
Any policy tips to make vnc'ing via vpn faster would be useful too ;) (its ok but i'm sure it could be a touch faster ;))
mark - at least we can poll together on this one - if matt gets one too :D
Regards
Nath
I mailed the watchguard tech team Nath and they recommended an x1000!
Plus i'm just trying logmein as a vpn solution - seems very nice :)
Thought it might be that - I *think* that comes with 6 ports active on it (lucky git) - 2 x external, 2 x trusted, 2 x optional (1st being for connection to powys router, the later being for physically seperate lan - policy manager defining what can see what :))
Cheers
N.