In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

You need a router that will do NON-NAT and NAT simultaneously

Correct. The only routers I know that do this is Draytek, via the LAN IP Network Configuration. You have a NAT range and a IP Routing (No-NAT) range.

All phones in the office are assigned as the original poster is asking for, each with a fixed IP (that can be accessed remote) and then all devices that do not need remote access are assigned from 192.168.* ranges. All work together flawless.

Ironically today we been looking ourselves for another brand of router that does both NAT and No-NAT at the same time, without any luck. I can't personally believe that only Draytek do this.

But he seems to be asking for this based on incorrect advice based on asking a question caused by misinformation.

So far as I can see a fairly bog-standard setup will supply what he needs. There is a huge difference between what a user wants and what he needs, (Lesson 1 of Systems Analysis training circa 1966), as the wants are usually based on the status quo (irrelevant here), or a lack of knowledge/information on his part. As seems to be the case here.

His answer to why he wants to continue seems to be that he has spent £12 so may as well continue. I haven't had an answer as to whether or not things worked before he got the block of IPs and tried to use it.

I think it likely ian72 was on the right tack in this post. And camieabz when asking what is the actual "business need".

There is no point in people who clearly understand how to supply what he is asking for, (just debating the best method), doing so if what he is asking is the wrong question. He says

Someone had mentioned to me that static IPs are best for VoIP so I went ahead and got some from Aquiss. It was a £12 setup charge so there's no point in throwing them out now really.

So, was he wrongly advised, and if so what is now the best course of action for him?

He continued

Besides, I'd like to access the IP phones remotely if something does go wrong with them if I'm on holiday or something.

I wonder how important that is to him if it becomes complicated and/or expensive, compared to writing off the 8 IP addresses and adopting a simpler solution to the business needs?

(Edit - typoes).

Edited by RobertoS (Fri 15-Apr-11 23:11:03)

In reply to a post by jdowning640:

I wish things would just work

Don't get too discouraged. We throw ideas around, giving them a few punches to see if they are worth their salt.

In reply to a post by jdowning640:

I haven't got room to put an old PC in (if you can see where the modem is on the old thread) however I do have another router I can use.

Fair enough. No room for a PC removes one option.

In reply to a post by jdowning640:

I want a really good advanced QoS feature but is there any for a low price? I don't even know why I bought static IPs as I don't even know how to work them. Just keeps coming up 'Checking DNS' on the IP phone now whenever I typed in the external DNS.

Jack

That router you have (WAG354G) has QoS settings for popular protocols and specified ports. No one is suggesting your throw it away.

The static IP block may or may not be ideal for your situation. Andrew's post regarding Gradwell's support page on private static IPs behind a NAT setup is definitely worth a read/think. Perhaps a quick phonecall to Gradwell, followed by a phonecall to your ISP to see what they think about Gradwell's recommendations and to see if there are any potential problems. Ask, ask, ask. You'll never know otherwise. You learn far more in IT when things don't work than when they do.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

So, was he wrongly advised, and if so what is now the best course of action for him?

*sighs*

Can I please get on the record, before fingers get pointed at us, at no point have we given out bad advise. The advise regarding his required setup was given to him by another 3rd party, not Aquiss.

We have followed a customer request for an account upgrade, which was ordered and actioned.

RobertoS, as you replied directly to my post. If your belief is that we were the ones who gave out the advice or spec, then your deeply wrong. I would advice consulting with the original poster to obtain detail of where the advice came from originally.

In reply to a post by aquiss:

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

So, was he wrongly advised, and if so what is now the best course of action for him?

*sighs*

Can I please get on the record, before fingers get pointed at us, at no point have we given out bad advise. The advise regarding his required setup was given to him by another 3rd party, not Aquiss.

Smiles at Martin.

I don't think I have implied the advice was anything to do with you Martin, if I have it certainly wasn't intentional. I start from this, in his opening post - "I was told that by using static IPs, things get sent straight over the internet without going through any firewalls etc."

The next sentence in that post does say that as a result he purchased a block from you, but please note in my first reply to him I quoted only the first sentence, and excluded everything else. That was not accidental - it was specifically intended to avoid any implication that you were responsible for the advice. I still believe this - it was nothing to do with you. Aquiss were asked to supply, they supplied, period! I doubt if they were even asked for an opinion.

Later in the thread, and in your post that I replied to, which is where you seem to have become disconcerted by me, I merely point out that the whole drift of expert advice on how to use these 8 IP addresses ignores the fact he may not need them at all. The best solution for him is what is needed, not necessarily what he is asking for and not the technically perfect one for someone with more complex needs. My statement "But he seems to be asking for this based on incorrect advice based on asking a question caused by misinformation" merely refers back to my original quote, and I repeat - is specifically intended not to point at yourselves.

My taking issue with you about the advice on the setup to use them is a different issue, aimed as I said at all the contributors who are doing their best to help him do that. My question is, with his real needs, may he be better just forgetting about the block of 8 and just using one, just as a normal static or even dynamic address?

I hope that clears the air - I certainly do not blame you for the situation, or contest the appropriateness of such a setup for yourselves. I replied directly to you as given the multitude of contributors, and the fact you are implicitly agreeing on the requested setup by saying you are using it, it seemed the obvious thing to do.

In drafting this reply though I started to wonder; if everything is working flawlessly why are you looking for a different router? But that is irrelevant to the issue of whether or not you gave incorrect advice in the first place.

You clearly did not.