1

I have 3 pc connected to a switch that is connected to a bigger network. I want those pc to live in their network and don't expose their ips. (in this very moment the scope is accomplished using a pc with 2 network ports and a nat utility which is not very effective 2pc====switch---pc---extNetwork)

I thought I should use a "router" that could handle calls in spite of them, is it correct? In this way, calls from outside have to be made to that router and handled to the single pcs on a PAT/NAT rules basis. could this work?

If yes, what is the correct type of hardware that I should use? I would need a small (4-8ports), maybe industrial-ish and cost-effective device. should that be a managed switch or a proper router? I can find a lot of managed/un-managed switches of any level of roughness but no routers over there.

2
  • You should use a router, or probably better is a firewall to separate the two networks. – Ron Maupin Feb 27 '20 at 16:30
  • Did any answer help you? If so, you should accept the answer so that the question doesn't keep popping up forever, looking for an answer. Alternatively, you can post and accept your own answer. – Ron Maupin Dec 17 '20 at 15:35
3

In order to do NAT, you need a router. Product recommendations are off topic here, but any commercial grade one ought to work.

You might also consider a bigger PC to NAT. It may be cheaper than a router.

2
  • I would like to avoid putting a pc in the middle – EisenRm Feb 27 '20 at 13:55
  • @EisenRm If you use the PC as NAT router/device, there's no other option than putting it in the data path. – Zac67 Feb 27 '20 at 15:08
1

You can go ahead with router and L2 managed switch . Router can be used for NAT configuration NAT overload/ 0r PAT whereas your private ip address are hidded

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.