Wireless 5040

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

"Liz" <liz@tiredofspam.com> shaped the electrons to say:
>because I run a couple of SMTP and NNTP servers; if you know a GOOD way to
>point a domain at a NAT-addressed machine I'm all ears

Multiple physical boxes or one box with multiple domains on one box?
The latter isn't hard, the former I don't really know of any good fix.

>yeah, 255 of them (or is it 254?) ... works great for a typical home setup
>...

254 actually for a /24 netmask - the low (.0) and high (.255) are
reserved. But you may be able to change the netmask on the router to
have even more.

-MZ, RHCE #806199299900541, ex-CISSP #3762
--
<URL:mailto:megazoneatmegazone.org> Gweep, Discordian, Author, Engineer, me.
"A little nonsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men" 508-755-4098
<URL:http/www.megazone.org/> <URL:http/www.eyrie-productions.com/> Eris

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On 17 May 2004 23:00:23 GMT, newsREMOVE@THISmegazone.org (MegaZone)
wrote:

>"Liz" <liz@tiredofspam.com> shaped the electrons to say:
>>because I run a couple of SMTP and NNTP servers; if you know a GOOD way to
>>point a domain at a NAT-addressed machine I'm all ears
>
>Multiple physical boxes or one box with multiple domains on one box?
>The latter isn't hard, the former I don't really know of any good fix.
>
>>yeah, 255 of them (or is it 254?) ... works great for a typical home setup
>>...
>
>254 actually for a /24 netmask - the low (.0) and high (.255) are
>reserved. But you may be able to change the netmask on the router to
>have even more.
>

You're forgetting about the one for the router itself, as I already
answered. It's probably .1, so 2-254 (minus any for other network
devices like bridges) are available for computers).

>-MZ, RHCE #806199299900541, ex-CISSP #3762

--
Mark Lloyd
http/go.to/notstupid
http/notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"It is a curious thing that every creed promises a
paradise which will be absolutely uninhabitable for
anyone of civilized taste." -- Evelyn Waugh

 

[mgg]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Hi Liz,

I use IIS just for the webservers, I use Argosoft for the mailserver. My
setup isn't mission critical, but here's what I have.

I have one machine running Win Server 2003 that hosts 3 websites. Two are
personal, and the third is for my business (that doesn't need one) and AAMOF
is not even built yet. However I *do* use my business domain for email. For
DNS I use Simple DNS (locally) and one of the free sites for the back-up.
Your setup will obviously allow you to have DNS servers on different (local)
IPs, but my goal was to use only one.

This setup works perfectly for me, and if I was only running a mailserver,
Argo does the job for many doamins without the need for Win Server 2003. It
*has* to be in conjunction with running your own primary DNS server though.
Simple DNS really is the key here, and even with multiple boxes, I'm sure it
can be set up to direct traffic to the appropriate private IP.

So, WS 2003 hasn't really added anything to the mix as far as I can see, but
in your case, it's running your own DNS server that's the key.

--Mike

"Liz" <liz@tiredofspam.com> wrote in message
news:B87qc.15640082$Of.2608557@news.easynews.com...
>
> "mgg" <mike@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:mIUpc.67860$Fd6.19075@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com...
>
>> Liz,
>>
>> 802.11b is just fine for getting info from the RTV servers, far better
> than
>> the internal modem. However, streaming is a different story. If there is
>> ZERO network traffic on your line, then the 11Mb/s will deliver a medium
>> quality recording with minimal pauses/skips (watchable). Have one system
>> receive email, and things go to hell in a handbasket pretty quick.
>> 802.11G
>> will work just fine for streaming as long as you're in range of the AP
>> for
> a
>> good link.
>
> ok .. gotcha ...
>
>> As far as the multiple IP addresses, I run 3 domains/websites and
>> corresponding mailservers off one static ip using Win Server 2003. It was
>> cheaper for me to buy the software rather than pay monthly for extra IP
>> addresses. Probably paid for itself in 10 months. Just an FYI.
>
> let me get clear on this one, though ... are you talking about all IIS
> (including mail server) ? I don't use IIS for mail (Mercury is free and
> excellent); is Win 2003 adding something new to the party ? I have it
> sitting here (uninstalled) ... Win 2000/IIS supports multiple domains ...
> are you using someone else's DNS and pointing all your domains at that
> single static IP ? How many physical machines are you using as servers ?
> If
> I have domain1.com on DELL1 and domain2.com on HP1 and DNS points both
> domains to 200.200.200.200 what software is figuring out how to route
> requests to domain1.com and domain2.com ?
>
> I'm not really concerned with what I pay for the 5 static IPs (not much)
> but
> there may be other useful options if I can understand what kind of
> configuration you're describing here ....
>
> thanks ...............
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

"mgg" <mike@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:VCAqc.50656$oF1.2245@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
> Hi Liz,
>
> I use IIS just for the webservers, I use Argosoft for the mailserver. My
> setup isn't mission critical, but here's what I have.
>
> I have one machine running Win Server 2003 that hosts 3 websites. Two are
> personal, and the third is for my business (that doesn't need one) and
AAMOF
> is not even built yet. However I *do* use my business domain for email.
For
> DNS I use Simple DNS (locally) and one of the free sites for the back-up.
> Your setup will obviously allow you to have DNS servers on different
(local)
> IPs, but my goal was to use only one.
>
> This setup works perfectly for me, and if I was only running a mailserver,
> Argo does the job for many doamins without the need for Win Server 2003.
It
> *has* to be in conjunction with running your own primary DNS server
though.
> Simple DNS really is the key here, and even with multiple boxes, I'm sure
it
> can be set up to direct traffic to the appropriate private IP.
>
> So, WS 2003 hasn't really added anything to the mix as far as I can see,
but
> in your case, it's running your own DNS server that's the key.

thanks for the comments; Simple DNS looks like a nice product ... now I
have to contemplate whether I want to become enough of a DNS guru to make
sure I know how to troubleshoot the inevitable glitches that come up (no
matter how simple it is)

if you're using it in conjunction with your mail server, you must be
exposing it to all Internet requests, no ? does it get all kinds of inbound
traffic ?

 

[mgg]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

>>if you're using it in conjunction with your mail server, you must be
exposing it to all Internet requests, no ? does it get all kinds of inbound
traffic ?<<

Port 53 is open for DNS, but since it's a "private" nameserver, it normally
only gets hit when someone sends or receives email (from inside or outside
of the domain). Sure, I get requests from search engines, and others
occasionally to resolve the names, but it's not even noticeable. The router,
MacAfee, and constant updates from MS have kept the nasties away so far...

When I started on this little project a few of years ago, I knew exactly
*zero* about DNS, IIS, mailservers, etc. As it turns out, the DNS was the
easiest part of the whole thing...for me anyway <g>. Simple DNS is just
that...simple.

--Mike

"Liz" <liz@tiredofspam.com> wrote in message
news:YtMqc.4837670$iA2.564443@news.easynews.com...
>
> "mgg" <mike@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:VCAqc.50656$oF1.2245@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
>> Hi Liz,
>>
>> I use IIS just for the webservers, I use Argosoft for the mailserver. My
>> setup isn't mission critical, but here's what I have.
>>
>> I have one machine running Win Server 2003 that hosts 3 websites. Two are
>> personal, and the third is for my business (that doesn't need one) and
> AAMOF
>> is not even built yet. However I *do* use my business domain for email.
> For
>> DNS I use Simple DNS (locally) and one of the free sites for the back-up.
>> Your setup will obviously allow you to have DNS servers on different
> (local)
>> IPs, but my goal was to use only one.
>>
>> This setup works perfectly for me, and if I was only running a
>> mailserver,
>> Argo does the job for many doamins without the need for Win Server 2003.
> It
>> *has* to be in conjunction with running your own primary DNS server
> though.
>> Simple DNS really is the key here, and even with multiple boxes, I'm sure
> it
>> can be set up to direct traffic to the appropriate private IP.
>>
>> So, WS 2003 hasn't really added anything to the mix as far as I can see,
> but
>> in your case, it's running your own DNS server that's the key.
>
> thanks for the comments; Simple DNS looks like a nice product ... now I
> have to contemplate whether I want to become enough of a DNS guru to make
> sure I know how to troubleshoot the inevitable glitches that come up (no
> matter how simple it is)
>
> if you're using it in conjunction with your mail server, you must be
> exposing it to all Internet requests, no ? does it get all kinds of
> inbound
> traffic ?
>
>
>