My situation is I have two network cards. I want to forward packets coming in
on one of the cards to a host and port accessible through the other card. I
do not want to turn on ICS because it forces me to use a particular IP
address on the card. Is there any way other than ICS in xp to do port
forwarding. I've tried netsh routing ip nat add portmapping but it doesn't
work. Does ICS or something else need to be turned on for that to work? If I
am successful with whatever method should I see the port listening if I do a
netstat -an

Mike Kenworthy wrote:
> My situation is I have two network cards. I want to forward packets coming in
> on one of the cards to a host and port accessible through the other card. I
> do not want to turn on ICS because it forces me to use a particular IP
> address on the card. Is there any way other than ICS in xp to do port
> forwarding. I've tried netsh routing ip nat add portmapping but it doesn't
> work. Does ICS or something else need to be turned on for that to work? If I
> am successful with whatever method should I see the port listening if I do a
> netstat -an

Just a question for you. What is the problem with being forced to use a
certain IP address when using ICS? I am not a network guru but I cannot
think of a problem with doing it that way. ICS is perfect for this and
the most simple way to do it.

--
http://www.americantechie.com

This is not so much a problem for me as it is a client's configuration. The
card where I would need to enable ICS gets its address from a wireless
router's DHCP pool. It will be a chore to rework this configuration to
support the ICS adapter.

"AmericanTechie" wrote:

> Mike Kenworthy wrote:
> > My situation is I have two network cards. I want to forward packets coming in
> > on one of the cards to a host and port accessible through the other card. I
> > do not want to turn on ICS because it forces me to use a particular IP
> > address on the card. Is there any way other than ICS in xp to do port
> > forwarding. I've tried netsh routing ip nat add portmapping but it doesn't
> > work. Does ICS or something else need to be turned on for that to work? If I
> > am successful with whatever method should I see the port listening if I do a
> > netstat -an
>
> Just a question for you. What is the problem with being forced to use a
> certain IP address when using ICS? I am not a network guru but I cannot
> think of a problem with doing it that way. ICS is perfect for this and
> the most simple way to do it.
>
> --
> http://www.americantechie.com
>

Mike Kenworthy wrote:
> This is not so much a problem for me as it is a client's configuration. The
> card where I would need to enable ICS gets its address from a wireless
> router's DHCP pool. It will be a chore to rework this configuration to
> support the ICS adapter.
>
> "AmericanTechie" wrote:
>
>
>>Mike Kenworthy wrote:
>>
>>>My situation is I have two network cards. I want to forward packets coming in
>>>on one of the cards to a host and port accessible through the other card. I
>>>do not want to turn on ICS because it forces me to use a particular IP
>>>address on the card. Is there any way other than ICS in xp to do port
>>>forwarding. I've tried netsh routing ip nat add portmapping but it doesn't
>>>work. Does ICS or something else need to be turned on for that to work? If I
>>>am successful with whatever method should I see the port listening if I do a
>>>netstat -an
>>
>>Just a question for you. What is the problem with being forced to use a
>>certain IP address when using ICS? I am not a network guru but I cannot
>>think of a problem with doing it that way. ICS is perfect for this and
>>the most simple way to do it.
>>
>>--
>>http://www.americantechie.com
>>

Off the top of my head I don't know of a better situation for your
network. Part of the reason is I don't know much info about your
network. Depending on the network setup, ICS might be perfect, in other
cases of course it may not be ideal. On my network for instance I had
the following...

Cable Modem => Wireless Router => ICS enabled comp => Hub => Other Computers

Among the "other computers" I had a web server accessible from anywhere.
You are saying this same setup will not work for your client, so you
might specify what challenges this setup might bring.

Otherwise I am not sure of anything native in Windows XP that will work
for what you want to do. Of course there is always third party and
hardware solutions, but that is probably outside of the scope of this
newsgroup.

You might give us a little more information as to why you don't want to
simply use dynamic addressing throughout the network.

--
http://www.americantechie.com

Check out this link
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;315236

"AmericanTechie" <nomail@americantechie.com> wrote in message
news:u7L4S0i9FHA.1028@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Mike Kenworthy wrote:
>> This is not so much a problem for me as it is a client's configuration.
>> The card where I would need to enable ICS gets its address from a
>> wireless router's DHCP pool. It will be a chore to rework this
>> configuration to support the ICS adapter.
>>
>> "AmericanTechie" wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Mike Kenworthy wrote:
>>>
>>>>My situation is I have two network cards. I want to forward packets
>>>>coming in on one of the cards to a host and port accessible through the
>>>>other card. I do not want to turn on ICS because it forces me to use a
>>>>particular IP address on the card. Is there any way other than ICS in xp
>>>>to do port forwarding. I've tried netsh routing ip nat add portmapping
>>>>but it doesn't work. Does ICS or something else need to be turned on for
>>>>that to work? If I am successful with whatever method should I see the
>>>>port listening if I do a netstat -an
>>>
>>>Just a question for you. What is the problem with being forced to use a
>>>certain IP address when using ICS? I am not a network guru but I cannot
>>>think of a problem with doing it that way. ICS is perfect for this and
>>>the most simple way to do it.
>>>
>>>--
>>>http://www.americantechie.com
>>>
>
> Off the top of my head I don't know of a better situation for your
> network. Part of the reason is I don't know much info about your network.
> Depending on the network setup, ICS might be perfect, in other cases of
> course it may not be ideal. On my network for instance I had the
> following...
>
> Cable Modem => Wireless Router => ICS enabled comp => Hub => Other
> Computers
>
> Among the "other computers" I had a web server accessible from anywhere.
> You are saying this same setup will not work for your client, so you might
> specify what challenges this setup might bring.
>
> Otherwise I am not sure of anything native in Windows XP that will work
> for what you want to do. Of course there is always third party and
> hardware solutions, but that is probably outside of the scope of this
> newsgroup.
>
> You might give us a little more information as to why you don't want to
> simply use dynamic addressing throughout the network.
>
> --
> http://www.americantechie.com

Thanks for your help. I think you've convinced me that the best thing to do
is push the client to change the network configuration so we can use ICS.

Thanks again.

"AmericanTechie" wrote:

> Mike Kenworthy wrote:
> > This is not so much a problem for me as it is a client's configuration. The
> > card where I would need to enable ICS gets its address from a wireless
> > router's DHCP pool. It will be a chore to rework this configuration to
> > support the ICS adapter.
> >
> > "AmericanTechie" wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Mike Kenworthy wrote:
> >>
> >>>My situation is I have two network cards. I want to forward packets coming in
> >>>on one of the cards to a host and port accessible through the other card. I
> >>>do not want to turn on ICS because it forces me to use a particular IP
> >>>address on the card. Is there any way other than ICS in xp to do port
> >>>forwarding. I've tried netsh routing ip nat add portmapping but it doesn't
> >>>work. Does ICS or something else need to be turned on for that to work? If I
> >>>am successful with whatever method should I see the port listening if I do a
> >>>netstat -an
> >>
> >>Just a question for you. What is the problem with being forced to use a
> >>certain IP address when using ICS? I am not a network guru but I cannot
> >>think of a problem with doing it that way. ICS is perfect for this and
> >>the most simple way to do it.
> >>
> >>--
> >>http://www.americantechie.com
> >>
>
> Off the top of my head I don't know of a better situation for your
> network. Part of the reason is I don't know much info about your
> network. Depending on the network setup, ICS might be perfect, in other
> cases of course it may not be ideal. On my network for instance I had
> the following...
>
> Cable Modem => Wireless Router => ICS enabled comp => Hub => Other Computers
>
> Among the "other computers" I had a web server accessible from anywhere.
> You are saying this same setup will not work for your client, so you
> might specify what challenges this setup might bring.
>
> Otherwise I am not sure of anything native in Windows XP that will work
> for what you want to do. Of course there is always third party and
> hardware solutions, but that is probably outside of the scope of this
> newsgroup.
>
> You might give us a little more information as to why you don't want to
> simply use dynamic addressing throughout the network.
>
> --
> http://www.americantechie.com
>