I am wondering if ZeroShell will meet my needs as a 3 port router.
I have a client who needs two IP subnets at one location, one with 5 static IPs and one with at least 1 static IP. Our ISP can provide this over one internet connection to save the expense of having two internet connections. This can be provided in either of two ways:
1) A subnet of 16 IPs (14 usable), which I’m hoping ZeroShell could then subnet into two subnets of 8 IPs (6 usable each), and route traffic between, and to/from the internet.
2) A subnet of 8 IPs (6 usable) and a second subnet of 4 IPs (2 usable), which I’m hoping ZeroShell could then route traffic between, and to/from the internet.
Are either of these options better than the other, other than the first one providing unneeded IPs on the second subnet?
We are not looking for NAT, PAT, or firewalling, as we want VPNs to operate across this router without any hinderance or special configuration. We will have two gateways behind the ZeroShell box. One is a 3com OfficeConnect and the other is a SolutionIP box which will be handling VPNs for public connections.
Is ZeroShell suitable for this purpose?
Thank you in advance for any suggestions.
Yes, Zeroshell could help you.
You could adopt the second solution in which you split your original network with mask 255.255.255.240 into the 3 subnet (with masks 255.255.255.248, 255.255.255.252 and 255.255.255.252). You have to assign an IP for every subnet to one interface or VLAN of the Zeroshell router.