Re: Ghost IP assignmnet
- From: "Egbert Nierop \(MVP for IIS\)" <egbert_nierop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:55:52 +0100
"Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message news:OtEIY4N3FHA.3600@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Why? Lots of people with simple one segment LANs prefer to use the same IP subnet for their remotes and let RRAS get a pool of addresses from DHCP. This has been the default setup since the early days of RAS in NT. The remote users then have access to all machines on the LAN by default (because the server acts as a proxy for the remotes). It is only a problem if the RRAS server is a DC.
If you put the remote users in their own subnet (which I usually do, I admit) you need to enable IP routing on the RRAS server. You may also need to modify your LAN routing to allow the remotes full access to the LAN machines on a routed LAN.
If you read the documentation you will see there is a lot said about the advantages and disadvantages of using on-subnet or off-subnet addresses for remotes.
ah ha,
In fact, I finally started to use VPN because my DSL router, supports the correct VPN pass-through protocoals (other than passing TCP port 1723).
Happy to meet you as an expert on this. Reading all the docs for all services on Windows server does not make sense...
.
- References:
- Ghost IP assignmnet
- From: Egbert Nierop \(MVP for IIS\)
- Re: Ghost IP assignmnet
- From: Bill Grant
- Re: Ghost IP assignmnet
- From: Egbert Nierop \(MVP for IIS\)
- Re: Ghost IP assignmnet
- From: Bill Grant
- Ghost IP assignmnet
- Prev by Date: Re: Ghost IP assignmnet
- Next by Date: Re: Unable to get clients machines to communicate over VPN tunnel
- Previous by thread: Re: Ghost IP assignmnet
- Next by thread: Re: Win2K3 domain account connecting to Win2K VPN server in an NT4 dom
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
