PureBasic Forums - English

OK - I have searched the forums and PureArea and cannot find what I am looking for. And I don't want to reinvent the wheel just yet.

Here is what I am looking for (and is it even possible with PB?):

A "micro-router" that routes the IP traffic on a specific port from the listening PC to another PC on the network.

I have a client that I need to support a database that is installed on a server on their network but the server is not attached to the Internet, however other PCs in the office are. I want to install a simple software router on a "internet-accessible" PC then route a specific port to the server so I can access it remotely.

Has this been done already in PureBasic? Or does anyone know of a simple tool to do this?

Its only need for Windows-based PCs.

Any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

And your client agreed to this!? Off the bat I'd say this has to done at a lower level using gateway software. Maybe with PB if server comms is simple text and protocol (be slow though in comparison). Back to the big problem: security - if the server/nw ain't got a route to the external world then it's usually for very good reasons and if something goes wrong you may be held responsible. Just my 2cents worth.

Thanks for your concern. They already have a firewall in place. Yes, the client agreed to use secure hamachi (www.hamachi.cc) as a VPN to access their PC so no ports are open on the firewall.

To clarify, I am not requesting a software router to replace a hardware firewall/router, I just need to get one port forwarded/routed to a different PC on the network.

ok. easiest answer: google for pc-based "gateway/ip-forwarding" software. They used to be quite common to share single modem connection from one pc on a network. HTH

@dmoc: Why should that be more secure than programming it yourself? If normal non-device-driver software actually can catch, modify and then send the packets why shouldnt it be able to deliver the contents to another pc?

still wondering why that software would be more secure..



Of course, the fastest, best and most secure option is a hardware router.

Deleted for everybody's sake

Thanks for all the suggestions. I will try a different approach to the explanation.

PC A and PC B are connected via a local area network.

PC A receives external requests and is behind a firewall/hardware router.

Any requests to port 687 on PC A, I need to forward to PC B which is not connected externally.

I cannot use the hardware router to forward the requests to PC B, just PC A.

I'm sorry if I am confusing anyone, but I don't know how else to explain it.

Thanks again for all the suggestions so far.

Straker wrote:Thanks for all the suggestions. I will try a different approach to the explanation.

PC A and PC B are connected via a local area network.

PC A receives external requests and is behind a firewall/hardware router.

Any requests to port 687 on PC A, I need to forward to PC B which is not connected externally.

I cannot use the hardware router to forward the requests to PC B, just PC A.

I'm sorry if I am confusing anyone, but I don't know how else to explain it.

Thanks again for all the suggestions so far.

http://desproxy.sourceforge.net/

Look at socket2socket specifically.

Thanks for all the suggestions. However, I think I found a solution here:

http://www.skylarktechnology.com/software/download.php

Pretty cool tool, I was hoping that there might be one in PureBasic though.

Cheers and thanks again.

thefool:

Why should that be more secure than programming it yourself? If normal non-device-driver software actually can catch, modify and then send the packets why shouldnt it be able to deliver the contents to another pc?

Question of security was related to providing *any* outside access to system configured (possibly) to prevent it, ie, server-to-pc, pc-to-internet *but* no direct server-to-internet. This is a policy issue not a technical one. The *seperate* technical issue of how to route packets came down to: DIY or off-the-shelf. Anyone with the ability to code a DIY solution needs more than average programming skills and would simply be re-inventing the wheel, probably not very well and at greater time/cost.

@Straker: Looks like an excellent find!