Bryan,
I'm sorry for the confusion, I may have thrown a few ideas around at
once. However my goal the whole time has been to try and prevent a
NAT behind another NAT.
My m0n0 wall be doing a NAT for OPT1, and all my clients will hang off
of that. If I subnet OPT1 I believe I can prevent a NAT behind NAT
situation.
The easiest situation would have been to assign each client an
internal IP address, and then do a NAT on that to create their own
private internal network.
I was just afraid of any support issues with NAT behind NAT, thinking
that some things may not work correctly. If I go with subnetting, it
will eliminate any of those problems.
I hope I make more sense now.
BTW, I will be using Linksys WRT54G's at my main AP and also at the
client end. They are running Sveasoft firmware, which supports OSPF
routing. However that is a whole new ball game that I'm not sure I
wanna get into right now.
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:56:21 -0400, Bryan Brayton <bryan at sonicburst dot net> wrote:
> Maybe I'm missing something here, but didn't Joe have client routers in
> the mix?
>
> So without IP aliases, but with static routes on the m0n0 on the LAN (or
> OPT or whatever) pointing at the various internal routers, wouldn't this
> work:
>
> WAN
> |
> Joe's M0n0 box
> |
> LAN 10.1.0.1/24
> |
> |
> |----------------------------------------
> | |
> Client 1 Router WAN 10.1.0.2/24 Client 2 Router WAN 10.1.0.3/24
> | (default rt 10.1.0.1) | (default rt 10.1.0.1)
> | |
> Client 1 Router Client 2 Router
> | |
> Client 1 Router LAN 10.1.1.1/24 Client 2 Router LAN 10.1.2.1/24
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | |
> Client 1 LAN (default gw 10.1.1.1) Client 2 LAN (default gw
> 10.1.2.1)
>
> If dynamic routing was supported, you wouldn't have to manually enter
> the routes. You will need firewalling on the client routers to prevent
> inter-client communication.
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm sure I'll regret that :)
>
> -Bryan
| 