On 05/28/2014 03:27 PM, John R Pierce wrote: > On 5/28/2014 12:00 PM, Michael Hennebry wrote: >> I want the second computer to not have its own global IP address. >> It will at least occasionally run Windows. >> I'd prefer not to assume that Windows will >> not try to fetch an IP address behind my back. > what do you mean by 'global IP address' ? Choice of terminology is pretty important; Cisco's consistent (if a bit awkward) four-way terminology for NAT (inside local, inside global, outside local, outside global; see http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ip/network-address-translation-nat/4606-8.html) is pretty much the standard from a netadmin point of view. I'm thinking he means that he wants the Windows box to have an inside local address but no inside global address (meaning that in order to access the Internet the host to be accessed would have to either be proxied or have an outside local address (most consumer routers don't implement the outside half of the cisco quartet, but some do)). I have several machines here that have no inside global address and thus don't have routability to the internet (they're in a deny line of the NAT pool ACL).