REAL NAT networking (like Workstation)

[JeanneD4RK]

Hi

I do find there is a big gap between VirtualBox and VMWare Workstation Pro.

The NAT networking is way more efficient in Workstation.

It creates a LAN, the NAT interface on the host, sets it to fixed IP and adds (or not) the DHCP service on guest OS.

Why is it still not implemented in VirtualBox yet ? It kills very painful port forwarding...

Thanks for answers

[mpack]

I find your problem description vague. Can you make a suggestion without reference to software that none of us use?

Have you looked at NAT networking as documented in VirtualBox (quite distinct from NAT)?

[michaln]

You're surprised that a $250 product can do more than a free product? I'm surprised!

VirtualBox development is driven by what paying customers ask for and what contributors contribute. The existing NAT implementation (well, two of them) works well enough for VirtualBox customers.

If VirtualBox does not fit your needs, please do not feel obligated to use it. Use what works for you. But complaining that you get less for free than you get for $250 is really futile.

[JeanneD4RK]

I find your problem description vague. Can you make a suggestion without reference to software that none of us use?

Have you looked at NAT networking as documented in VirtualBox (quite distinct from NAT)?

I'd like to see a network interface like "Host only" but with NAT integrated, to be able to, for example, RDP on the LocalNAT lan without having to forward ports.
I read the docs bus found nothing talking about this kind of feature.

GW to NAT : 192.168.234.1
HOST : 192.168.234.2

VMs : 192.168.234.100-200

You're surprised that a $250 product can do more than a free product? I'm surprised!

VirtualBox development is driven by what paying customers ask for and what contributors contribute. The existing NAT implementation (well, two of them) works well enough for VirtualBox customers.

If VirtualBox does not fit your needs, please do not feel obligated to use it. Use what works for you. But complaining that you get less for free than you get for $250 is really futile.

I'm not saying that it's unacceptable, calm down. I posted in SUGGESTION, it SUGGESTS improvement and I only aked a question.

[mpack]

You actually didn't suggest an improvement, you only suggested copying some other software. You neglected to explain why that would be an improvement. That's why I asked you to clarify.

So you want to see additional functionality incorported into NAT network mode. Fine, perhaps the devs will find time for that one day.

[Perryg]

Actually from what I can see ( and this is just a guess ) what the OP has not understood from the manual is for what they want VBox provides a virtual bridged adapter to allow what they really want.

[JeanneD4RK]

Actually from what I can see ( and this is just a guess ) what the OP has not understood from the manual is for what they want VBox provides a virtual bridged adapter to allow what they really want.

Virtual bridged adapter ? You mean binding my physical interfaces to the VM ? Because I have never seen any other "birdged adapter" elsewhere...

[Perryg]

All VirtualBox is concerned about is connecting the guest to some kind of network. If you bridge to your home/corp. NAT network it will be the same as what I think you are really looking for since it makes the guest resemble a stand alone PC as far as the LAN is concerned. VBox NAT is designed to isolate the guest/s in their own NAT which you will find keeps them from being able to communicate between themselves ( easily ). The new VBox NATnet is like a virtual switch and does function close to what I believe you are trying to do but there are limitations IMHO.

[JeanneD4RK]

Yes but what if I want to create a DC with DHCP etc in a VM and want to RDP in it and be able to ping all clients on the "laboratory" subnet, all that with a NAT access to Internet ?

If I bridge, DHCP will probably shutdown my real LAN
If I NAT, I can't RDP / SSH / PING any guest without port forwarding...

[Perryg]

That is why Internal network was developed. It allows you to setup a lab outside your LAN and keep it from interfering. Then add a virtual router to allow access to the LAN or Internet. pFsence is my preference but you can use anything you like.

[JeanneD4RK]

Ok so there is no integrated solution possible, nor planned ?

I'll must build it myself then

Thanks

[Perryg]

As with everything there is differences in how to achieve the end results. I am sure your suggestion will be given all due considerations.

[JeanneD4RK]

In fact it would be lovely if contributors could implement this feature.

It can be achieved as a side feature on almost every server but an additional VM eats at least 256MB in RAM, takes time to boot, takes disk space, etc and in the end much less optimized than a native feature.

Thanks for the reply, I hope some contributors will read this and find my suggestion interesting.

[Perryg]

By the way you can achieve a virtual router guest with 64MB of RAM. some older DOS routers were less than a MB.

[noteirak]

Another way is to create a host-only interface, configure your VMs to use it and enable IP routing & Masquerading on the host.
- You do get a host interface
- You do get DHCP
- You do get NAT feature

Very easy to do on a Linux host (or any Unix-like OS), difficult on Windows.