Page 2 of 2
Posted: 27. Dec 2008, 12:37
by sej7278
why not just using bridging (host interface) instead of this nat+portforwarding rubbish?
i've never understood it - is it just because nat is the default and people have not bothered to read the manual to find out what the other options do?
Posted: 27. Dec 2008, 12:58
by TerryE
sej7278 wrote:why not just using bridging (host interface) instead of this nat+portforwarding rubbish?
It used to be a pain in the arse setting up host IF with a Wifi link. I haven't played with this 2.1 functionality to see if it is easier now.
Posted: 27. Dec 2008, 23:36
by sej7278
TerryE wrote:sej7278 wrote:why not just using bridging (host interface) instead of this nat+portforwarding rubbish?
It used to be a pain in the arse setting up host IF with a Wifi link. I haven't played with this 2.1 functionality to see if it is easier now.
ah right, my servers don't use wireless (!) so i wouldn't know.
Posted: 28. Dec 2008, 00:45
by Sasquatch
TerryE wrote:sej7278 wrote:why not just using bridging (host interface) instead of this nat+portforwarding rubbish?
It used to be a pain in the arse setting up host IF with a Wifi link. I haven't played with this 2.1 functionality to see if it is easier now.
HIF wifi works now without issues. Though I did have a disconnect on my PC (could be the driver though), but my laptop didn't have a disconnect of the wifi.