Yes I understand what you are saying and I do not consider myself an expert just offering what worked for me and it is probably over simplified. In my case it was a home network of pc's (all in the 192.168.0.???) using a linux box to masq the IP address so that they could all use the one valid IP address. Active FTP would cause the FTP server to try and connect to the linux box because that was the address it was getting and this wouldn't work (even if it got the correct address of the client it would not be able to make a connection to it). The passive FTP made the client make the connections and therefore all the server did was respond to the packets so that when the packet started at the client and was masq on the return trip it would work it's way back to the correct client. Perhaps I can learn something here, I would suspect (and hope) that the server would be replying back to the VPN server and then the VPN server handing the connection back to the client in the case of
  VPN. I
 am under the understanding that these are used for secure connections. If the server was not following this path back but rather making a connection to the client directly wouldn't this bypass the VPN security?
 
Harry

Jim Phillips <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I don't believe the problem is with the FTP, I believe
the problem is the router not passing on the LAN
address (192.168.3) of the PC trying to use FTP.

Jim

--- Harry Morris wrote:

> Ok I am not sure if the FTP on the 3000 will support
> this since we do not use it but I have had this
> problem myself connecting to different servers. You
> can try using passive ftp. usually a setting in the
> client ftp program.
> 
> Jim Phillips wrote:We have a
> LAN that uses 10.251.46.nnn with a subnet
> mask of .192 (which gives us 64 addresses) and we
> have
> run out of space. I am locked into this addressing
> scheme as it works with our frame relay circuits to
> the remote plants. So, being in need of more IP
> addresses, I thought "Why not set up another LAN
> using
> 192.168.3.nnn and then connect the new LAN to the
> 3000
> just like my VPN's do?"
> 
> Well, easier said than done.
> 
> Using a router to translate from the 192.168.3
> network
> to the 10.251.46 network I can get PC's to connect
> to
> the 3000 using NS/VT or telnet; however, I can't get
> FTP to work between the PC and the 3000. I
> configured
> the router with a LAN address of 192.168.3.1 and a
> WAN
> address of 10.251.46.nnn, and I also configured the
> neighbor gateway on the 3000. Upon investigation, I
> found that the reason FTP won't work is because the
> router is only presenting the WAN address to the
> 3000
> and not the 192.168.3 address of the PC. Now on the
> VPN's the 192.168 address comes through the router
> to
> the 3000 so FTP works perfectly fine. This is a
> Linksys BEFSR41 router.
> 
> Now, I know I can't be the first person who needed
> to
> connect two disparate LAN's to the 3000. Does anyone
> have any ideas on how to make this work?
> 
> Jim Phillips
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________ 
> Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in
> one click.
> http://farechase.yahoo.com
> 
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change
> list settings, *
> * etc., please visit
> http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
> 
> 





__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com


* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *