Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 1 of 60 PageID #: 43115
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 1 of 60 PagelD #: 43115
`
`ATTACHMENT1
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 2 of 60 PageID #: 43116
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 2 of 60 PagelD #: 43116
`
`
`
`AFFIDAVIT OF CHRISTOPHER BUTLER
`
`www.archive.org
`415.561.6767
`415.840-0391 e-fax
`
`1. lam the Office Managerat the Internet Archive, located in San Francisco,
`California. I make this declaration of my own personal knowledge.
`2. The Internet Archive is a website that provides accesstoadigital library of
`Internet Archive
`300 Funston Avenue
`Internet sites and othercultural artifacts in digital form. Like a paperlibrary, we provide
`San Francisco, CA 94118
`free access to researchers, historians, scholars, and the general public. The Internet
`Archive has partnered with and receives support from variousinstitutions, including the
`Library of Congress.
`3. The Internet Archive has created a service known as the Wayback Machine. The
`Wayback Machine makesit possible to surf more than 400 billion pages stored in the
`Internet Archive's web archive. Visitors to the Wayback Machine cansearch archives
`by URL (i.e., a website address). If archived records for a URL are available, the visitor
`will be presented with a list of available dates. The visitor may select one of those
`dates, and then begin surfing on an archived version of the Web. Thelinks on the
`archived files, when served by the Wayback Machine, point to other archivedfiles
`(whether HTML pagesor images). If a visitor clicks on a link on an archived page, the
`Wayback Machine will serve the archived file with the closest available date to the page
`upon which the link appeared and wasclicked.
`4, The archived data made viewable and browseable by the Wayback Machineis
`compiled using software programs known as crawlers, which surf the Web and
`automatically store copies of web files, preserving these files as they exist at the point of
`time of capture.
`5. The Internet Archive assigns a URL onits site to the archivedfiles in the format
`http://web.archive.org/web/[Year in yyyy][Month in mm][Day in dd][Time codein
`hh:mm:ss]/[Archived URL]. Thus, the Internet Archive URL
`http://web.archive.org/web/19970126045828/http://www.archive.org/ would be the
`URLfor the record of the Internet Archive home page HTMLfile
`(http://www.archive.org/) archived on January 26, 1997 at 4:58 a.m. and 28 seconds
`(1997/01/26 at 04:58:28). A web browser may beset such that a printout from it will
`display the URL of a web pagein the printout’s footer. The date assigned by the Internet
`Archive applies to the HTMLfile but not to imagefiles linked therein. Thus imagesthat
`appear on a page may not have been archived on the same date as the HTMLfile.
`Likewise, if a website is designed with "frames," the date assigned by the Internet
`Archive applies to the frameset as a whole, and not the individual pages within each
`frame.
`6. Attached hereto as Exhibit A are true and accurate copies of printouts of the
`Internet Archive's records of the HTMLfiles for the URLsand the dates specified in the
`footer of the printout.
`7. | declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
`
`DATE:
`
`(2. [22/15
`
`)
`
`
`Cry—
`
`Christopher Butler
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 3 of 60 PageID #: 43117
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 3 of 60 PagelD #: 43117
`
`CALIFORNIAJURAT
`
`See Attached Document.
`
`A notary public or other officer completing this
`certificate verifies only the identity of the
`individual who signed the document to whichthis
`certificate is atached, and not the truthfulness,
`
`accuracy, or validity of that document.
`
`State of California
`County of San Francisco
`
`
`
`
`
`Jf
`Commission # 2086421
`ak
`Z
`Notary Public - California
`
`a
`v7
`San Francisco County
`
`SSE"
`av Comm,ExpiresOct17,2018
`|
`
`Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on
`this
`
`end day ofDeumber— , 20/8, by
`
`Christopher Butler,
`
`proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be
`the person who appeared before me.
`
`Signature:
`
`

`

`NAT and FecagesPpeqBEEMPIHOA53-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 4 of 60 PagelD #: 43118
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 4 of 60 PageID #: 43118
`
`1 of 3
`
`NAT and Peer-to-peer networking
`
`Peer-to-peeris a style of networking in which a group of computers communicate directly with each other, rather than
`throughacentral server. This is often used for multiplayer online games, such as Activision's Battlezone, to avoid the
`expense and delay of handlingall thattraffic at the server. However,this style of networking often has problems dealing
`with Network Address Translators (NATs). In this page, I describe a way to solve these problems. Products that use this
`technique now workproperly through several commercial NATs.
`
`The situation
`
`The Internet is based on 32-bit IP (Internet Protocol) addresses, which means the theoretical maximum numberof computers
`on the Internetis 4 billion or so. The practical limit is much lower, due to inefficiences in how IP addressesare used. In fact,
`the Internet may be only a few years away from running out of IP addresses.
`
`AsIP addresses becomescarce, a technique known as Network Address Translation, or NAT, was developed to allow the
`use of a single IP address for a whole network of computers.
`
`A NATsits inbetween the public Internet and the network it serves, and works by rewriting IP addresses and port numbersin
`IP headers onthefly so the packets all appear to be coming from (or goingto) the single public IP address of the NAT
`device instead of the actual source or destination.
`
`NATis now commonly employed in small home-office routers and in software used by consumers to connect several
`personal computersto a single cable modem.It is even used by someInternet Service providers.
`
`(NATis not the only possible solution; proxy servers are also commonlyused, but require more configuration, and
`sometimes require custom client software. Eventually, we'll all switch to IPv6, which will have 128-bit addresses, and will
`solve the problem onceandforall, but that's probably not going to be commonplace for manyyears.)
`
`Some Protocols Aren't NAT-Friendly
`
`Someapplications send IP addressesor port numbers hidden inside their datapackets, where NATcan't properly rewrite
`them - so those applications don't work when youtry to use them on computers behind NATs.
`
`Some NATs, for security reasons, only allow incomingtraffic from an outside address if an outgoing packet has already been
`sent to that outside address. This meansthat two people behind different NATs can't open up connections to each otherin the
`usual way - ever!
`
`The solution
`
`Peer-to-peer protocols that wish to be NAT-friendly must be aware that any addresses they embed in their data packets may
`be invalid once the packets pass through the NAT, and compensate accordingly. One wayto doit is as follows:
`
`All traffic between the peersis done via a single UDPport. There is an address server which is not behind any NAT.Users
`connectto the addressserverfirst, and send it the IP address they think they have; the server notes both that address and the
`address it sees in the UDP header. The server then sends both addresses to the otherpeers. At this point, everyone knows
`everyoneelse's address(es).
`
`To open up peer-to-peer connections, all old peers send a UDP packet to the new peer, and the new peer sends a UDPpacket
`to each of the old peers. Since nobody knowsatfirst whether they are behind the same NAT,thefirst packetis always sent to
`both the public and the private address.
`
`This causes everyone's NAT to open up a bidirectional hole for the UDPtraffic to go through. Oncethefirst reply comes
`back from eachpeer, the sender knows which return addressto use, and can stop sending to both addresses.
`
`
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/19990420024 156/http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~dank/peer-nat html
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 5 of 60 PageID #: 43119
`NATand Reraéepgeyg2e4100453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 5 of 60 PagelD #: 43119
`
`2 of 3
`
`Compatibility Requirements
`
`Aboveand beyond the basic NAT RFC, a NATdevice that wants to support this scheme should have the following desirable
`property:
`
`NATs should not change the number of UDP ports used by a streamofpackets.
`
`For example, if a host behind a NAT sendsa series of three packets from a single UDPport, the packets as relayed by the
`NATshould also appear to come from a single host and UDPport.
`
`Draft RFC
`
`I'm working on a draft RFC describing this technique in more detail. Contact meif you're interested.
`
`Compatibility Test Results
`
`I am testing the compatibility of this approach with several NAT implementations. Here are partial results:
`
`Known Compatible NAT Implementations
`
`e NAT1000 - fully compatible. Thanks to Nevod fortheir early help doing compatibility testing. They didn't need to
`change anything; the technique just plain worked with their NAT.
`e SyGate - fully compatible. Although I had some wierd trouble with my network while testing SyGate, it seemsto
`workfine in the most common configuration.
`e NAT32- the beta test version released Jan 5th, 1999 is fully compatible.
`e Linux IP Masquerading - kernel 2.2.1 should work (though I haven't tested it since 2.2.0-pre6-ac2). See Juanjo's page
`
`for the patch forearlier 2.1 kernels. For 2.0 kernels, see the backport to kernel 2.0.36 by Glenn Lamb; Glenn's port
`makesit a configure-time option CONFIG_IP_MASQ_LOOSE_UDP,whichis a nice touch.
`° WinNAT- their current release worksfine. They don't haveafree trial version on their web site, but I hear they will in
`afew weeks.
`
`
`
`NATImplementations Soon to be Compatible
`
`e Arescom Apex 1100 ISDN Router - Arescom has a firmwarepatchthat fixes the problem, butit hasn't been released
`yet.
`e Vicomsoft Softrouter Plus Vicom sent me a version that fixes the problem, butit hasn't been released yet. - Note: you
`may haveto disableall native TCP bindings on the gateway machine exceptfor one pointing to the inside ethernet
`adapter for this implementation to work. Be sure to read their docall the way throughbefore using their Setup
`Assistant.
`
`Not yet known to be compatible
`
`e Cisco IOS has a built-in NAT capability that might or might not be compatible. I'm talking with an engineerat Cisco,
`and we'll be running sometests soon.
`e We havetestedall the win32 software NATs wecan get our hands on. We havenotyet tested the NATsbuilt into many
`small homeoffice routers, nor the standalone NATs such as the SonicWall.
`
`Not compatible
`
`e Any pureproxyserversolution, such as Wingate 2 or PPPShar, will not work properly. (Wingate 3 beta implements a
`proprietary form of HNAT, and does work properly.)
`
`Discussion Area
`
`I'd love to hear whatother developers think aboutthis technique, or about how Masgqcould be rewritten to reuse UDP ports
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/ 19990420024156/http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~dank/peer-nat.html
`
`

`

`NAT and FeesdosppeyBehMor§§853-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 6 of 60 PagelD #: 43120
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 6 of 60 PageID #: 43120
`
`3 f3
`
`properly. Join the NAT-peer-games mailing list andlet's talk. Patches for a few games (Battlezone, Dark Reign, and Heavy
`Gear 2 Demo) to support NAT have been postedto thatlist, and can be found in its archives.
`
`Wierd problems
`
`While testing Sygate, and later NAT 1000, I had some wierd problems. Everything wasfine if the machine running the
`gateway is connectedto the Internet via a modem. Butif the the gateway machine was connectedto the Internet by Ethernet,
`clients couldn't access other hosts on that outer Ethernet.It's as if packets from the gateway werebeing utterly ignored by
`the other hosts on the outside Ethernet. Routers didn't ignore the packets, though, so connecting to distant hosts was no
`problem. Go figure. See my Usenet post for more info.
`
`I'm inclined to believe this was hardware trouble, but who knows...
`
`Links
`
`e JETF Working Group on NAT - new draft RFC's and mailing list. One of the documents even mentionsthis technique;
`search there for "Activision".
`e The NAT Page - lists some available NAT implementations
`e Linux IP Masquerading - all about Linux's 'Masq' implementation of NAT
`e Searchable Index of Masg mailing list
`e Linux IP NAT Forum - A paper about NAT, an old and unsupported implementation of NAT for Linux, and a
`discussion area. Mostly of historical interest.
`
`History
`
`This is to my knowledge a novel technique. I started working with it in 1997, and shipped myfirst product usingit in 1998.
`This technique was developed while working on multiplayer games at Activision.
`
`Dan Kegel
`Last updated January 29th, 1999
`
`
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/19990420024 156/http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~dank/peer-nat.html
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 7 of 60 PageID #: 43121
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 7 of 60 PagelD #: 43121
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ATTACHMENT 2
`ATTACHMENT2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 8 of 60 PageID #: 43122
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 8 of 60 PagelD #: 43122
`
`NATand Peer-to-peer networking
`
`Peer-to-peer is a style of networking in which a group of computers communicate directly with each
`other, rather than through a central server. This is often used for multiplayer online games, such as
`Activision's Battlezone, to avoid the expense and delay of handling all that traffic at the server.
`However, this style ofnetworking often has problems dealing with Network Address Translators
`(NATs). In this page, I describe a way to solve these problems. Products that use this technique now
`work properly through several commercial NATs.
`
`Thesituation
`
`The Internet is based on 32-bit IP (Internet Protocol) addresses, which means the theoretical maximum
`number of computers on the Internet is 4 billion or so. The practical limit is much lower, due to
`inefficiences in how IP addresses are used. In fact, the Internet may be only a few years away from
`running out of IP addresses.
`
`As IP addresses become scarce, a technique known as Network Address Translation, or NAT, was
`developed to allow the use of a single IP address for a whole network of computers.
`
`A NAT sits inbetween the public Internet and the network it serves, and works by rewriting IP
`addresses and port numbers in IP headers on the fly so the packets all appear to be coming from (or
`going to) the single public IP address ofthe NAT device instead ofthe actual source or destination.
`
`NAT is now commonly employed in small home-office routers and in software used by consumers to
`connect several personal computers to a single cable modem. It is even used by some Internet Service
`providers.
`
`(NAT is not the only possible solution; proxy servers are also commonly used, but require more
`configuration, and sometimes require custom client software. Eventually, we'll all switch to IPv6,
`which will have 128-bit addresses, and will solve the problem once and for all, but that's probably not
`going to be commonplace for many years.)
`
`Some Protocols Aren't NAT-Friendly
`
`Some applications send IP addresses or port numbers hidden inside thei datapackets, where NAT can't
`properly rewrite them - so those applications don't work when you try to use them on computers
`behind NATs.
`
`Some NATs, for security reasons, only allow incoming traffic from an outside address if an outgoing
`packet has already been sent to that outside address. This means that two people behind different NATs
`can't open up connections to each other in the usual way - ever!
`
`The solution
`
`Peer-to-peer protocols that wish to be NAT-friendly must be aware that any addresses they embed in
`their data packets may be invalid once the packets pass through the NAT, and compensate accordingly.
`One way to do itis as follows:
`
`All traffic between the peers is done via a single UDP port. There is an address server which is not
`behind any NAT. Users connect to the address server first, and send it the IP address they think they
`have; the server notes both that address and the address it sees in the UDP header. The server then
`BENNETT_000226
`BENNETT_000226
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 9 of 60 PageID #: 43123
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 9 of 60 PagelD #: 43123
`
`sends both addresses to the other peers. At this point, everyone knows everyone else's address(es).
`
`To open up peer-to-peer connections, all old peers send a UDP packet to the new peer, and the new
`peer sends a UDP packet to each of the old peers. Since nobody knows at first whether they are behind
`the same NAT,the first packet is always sent to both the public and the private address.
`
`This causes everyone's NAT to open up a bidirectional hole for the UDPtraffic to go through. Once the
`first reply comes back from each peer, the sender knows which return address to use, and can stop
`sending to both addresses.
`
`Compatibility Requirements
`
`Above and beyond the basic NAT RFC, a NAT device that wants to support this scheme should have
`the following desirable property:
`
`NATs should not change the number of UDP ports used by a stream ofpackets.
`
`Correlary:
`
`Ifa host behind a NATsends a series ofpacketsfrom a single UDP port, the packets as
`relayed by the NATshould also appear to comefrom a single host and UDPport.
`
`Draft RFC
`
`I'm working on a draft RFC describing this technique in more detail. Contact me ifyou're interested.
`
`Compatibility Test Results
`
`Tam testing the compatibility ofthis approach with several NAT implementations. Here are partial
`results:
`
`Known Compatible NAT Implementations
`
`« NAT1000 - fully compatible. Thanks to Nevod for their early help domg compatibility testing.
`They didn't need to change anything: the technique just plain worked with therr NAT. No longer
`available; Nevod was bought out by Microsoft.
`e Win98 SE contains Internet Connection Sharing software which traces its origins back to
`NAT1000, so it should work fine.
`SyGate - fully compatible.
`®
`e NAT32 - the beta test version released Jan 5th, 1999 1s fully compatible. Current releases are
`probably also fully compatible.
`® Linux IP Masquerading - kernel 2.2.1 and later should work fine. See Juanjo's page for the patch
`
`for earlier 2.1 kernels. For 2.0 kernels, see the backport to kernel 2.0.36 by Glenn Lamb; Glenn's
`port makes it a configure-time option CONFIGIPMASQLOOSEUDP. which is a nice
`touch.
`© WinNAT- their current release works fine.
`
`NAT Implementations Soon to be Compatible
`
`® Arescom Apex 1100 ISDN Router - Arescom has a firmware patch that fixes the problem as of
`January 1999: presumably it's in their standard firmware now, but I haven't confirmed it.
`® Vicomsoft Softrouter Plus Vicom has since released a version that should fix the problem, but I
`AT
`a
`a
`7
`ad
`qa
`Tit 1
`‘BENNETT000227
`re so
`.
`~
`BENNETT_000227
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 10 of 60 PageID #: 43124
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 10 of 60 PagelD #: 43124
`
`NaVeN T Nad a CMANCEe TO Test iT. - INOTe: YOU May NAVE 10 Gisavle all Naive 1UY DmMaiNgs on Ine
`gateway machine except for one pointing to the inside ethernet adapter for this implementation
`to work. Be sure to read their doc all the way through before using their Setup Assistant.
`
`Not yet known to be compatible
`
`# Cisco IOS has a built-in NAT capability that might or might not be compatible.
`e We have tested all the win3? software NATs we can get our hands on. We have not yet tested the
`NATsbuilt into many small home office routers, nor the standalone NATs such as the SonicWall.
`
`Not compatible
`
`* Any pure proxy server solution, such as Wingate ? or PPPShar, will not work properly.
`
`Software using this technique
`
`The following peer-to-peer network software packages are known to support operation from behind
`NATs:
`
`® Civilization: Call To Power
`
`* Heavy Gear 2
`
`Discussion Area
`
`I'd love to hear what other developers think about this technique, or about how Masq could be
`rewritten to reuse UDP ports properly. Jom the NAT-peer-games mailing list and let's talk.
`
`Wierd problems
`
`While testing Sygate, and later NAT1000, I had some wierd problems. Everything was fine ifthe
`machine running the gateway is connected to the Internet via a modem. But ifthe the gateway machine
`was connected to the Internet by Ethernet, clients couldn't access other hosts on that outer Ethernet. It's
`as if packets from the gateway were being utterly ignored by the other hosts on the outside Ethernet.
`Routers didn't ignore the packets, though, so connecting to distant hosts was no problem. Go figure.
`See my Usenet post for more info.
`
`I'm inclined to believe this was hardware trouble, but who knows...
`
`Links
`
`e JETF Working Group on NAT - new draft RFC’'s and mailing list. One ofthe documents even
`mentions this technique: search there for "Activision".
`e The NAT Page - lists some available NAT implementations
`® Linux IP Masquerading- all about Linux's 'Masq' implementation of NAT
`
`® Searchable Index of Masg mailing list
`* Linux JP NAT Forum - A paper about NAT. an old and unsupported implementation ofNAT for
`Linux, and a discussion area. Mostly ofhistorical interest.
`
`History
`
`This is to my knowledge a novel technique. I started working with it in 1997, and shipped my first
`BENNETT_000228
`BENNETT_000228
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 11 of 60 PageID #: 43125
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 11 of 60 PagelD #: 43125
`
`product using it in 1998. This technique was developed while working on multiplayer games at
`Nopiete:
`
`Copyright 1909 Dan Kegel
`dank(@alummni.caltech.edu
`Last updated: 17 July 1999
`[Return to www.kegel.com]
`
`BENNETT_000229
`BENNETT_000229
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 12 of 60 PageID #: 43126
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 12 of 60 PagelD #: 43126
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ATTACHMENT 3
`ATTACHMENT3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`alumnus.alumni.caltech.edu/~dank/Changes-peer-nat.html.txt
`2/21/2018
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 13 of 60 PageID #: 43127
`
`----------------------------
`revision 1.2
`date: 1999/07/17 21:39:30;
`Removed dated material. Emphasized correlary as suggested by one reader.
`----------------------------
`revision 1.1
`date: 1999/07/17 21:21:23;
`Initial revision
`=============================================================================
`
`http://alumnus.alumni.caltech.edu/~dank/Changes-peer-nat.html.txt
`
`1/1
`
`

`

`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 14 of 60 PageID #: 43128
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 14 of 60 PagelD #: 43128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ATTACHMENT 4
`ATTACHMENT4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`cable modem networking - Google Groups
`Page 1 of 25
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 15 of 60 PageID #: 43129
`
`Groups
`
`Home
`
`Click on a group’s star
`icon to add it to your
`favorites
`
`Recently viewed
`comp.dcom.lans.…
`
`Privacy - Terms of Service
`
`https://groups.google.com/forum/
`
`Search for topics
`
`comp.dcom.lans.ethernet ›
`cable modem networking
`10 posts by 10 authors
`
`tab...@pitt.edu
`
`7/20/99
`
`2 of my friends and I are planning to get cable modems (provided by Road
`Runner) in our apartment. Now, Road Runner says that we need to get a
`hub in order to share our internet access for our 3 computers; however,
`they also said that we need to pay an extra $10 per user so that we do
`not need to take turns using the access (i.e. if we pay for access on
`one computer, they say we cannot share it using the hub).
`
`My question is whether my friends and I really can share only one
`connection all at the same time. Granted it will be slower, but we do
`not want to pay an extra $20 per month on cable modems. If so, what
`software is required?
`
`Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
`Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
`
`Craig Wiesner
`
`tab...@pitt.edu wrote:
`
`- show quoted text -
`
`7/20/99
`
`You don't need to pay your cable modem provider any more
`money if you don't want to.
`
`Below are some URLs that you can use to learn about how to,
`and get software for sharing one Internet connection with
`multiple users. You will need to have two Ethernet cards in
`one of your PCs. The first one will connect to the Cable
`Modem and the second will connect to the hub where your
`friend's PCs will be connected. The PC with the two Ethernet
`cards will act as a "proxy server" or "router" for the other
`PCs. The PC with the two Ethernet cards will have two
`IP addresses. One, assigned by the cable company, and
`the other will be a "private" IP address. Your friend's PCs
`will also get private IP addresses from your "proxy" machine.
`
`FYI - Windows 98, release 2, includes Internet connection
`sharing software similar to that provided by some of the
`software listed below. They bought a product called NAT 2000
`and incorporated it into Windows 98 release 2.
`
`Anyway - all the details and the software needed can be
`found at the following URLs:
`
`http://www.timhiggins.com/ppd/sharing.htm
`http://www.wingate.net/
`http://www.sygate.com/
`http://www.miralink.com/nshare.htm
`http://www.winroute.com/
`http://www.sustworks.com/
`
`Sign in
`
`
`
`
`
`3/7/2016
`
`

`

`cable modem networking - Google Groups
`Page 2 of 25
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 16 of 60 PageID #: 43130
`
`
`
`
`
`3/7/2016
`
`http://www.grok.co.uk/netproxy/
`http://www.stargate.co.uk/mailgate/
`http://www.sonicsys.com/
`http://www.pppindia.com/intl/pppshar/
`http://www.umax.com/networking/
`http://www.nevod.com/
`http://www.gw.total-web.net/emailee/intro.html
`http://www.sharethenet.com/
`http://www.networkproducts.com/
`http://www.deksi.com/saps.htm
`http://www.diamondmm.com/products/current/homefreepna.cfm
`http://brivida.com/router/default.htm
`http://edge.fireplug.net/
`http://www.uq.net.au/~zzdmacka/the-nat-page/
`http://alumni.caltech.edu/~dank/peer-nat.html
`http://www.mischler.com/iproute/
`
`Craig
`--
`******************************************
`WK Multimedia Network Training
`InternetWorking Education Specialists
`http://www.wkmn.com
`
`Visit our Technical Reference Library
`Click through and buy books and we donate
`all proceeds to feed the homeless.
`http://www.wkmn.com/refer.html
`******************************************
`
`Peter Cioe
`
`7/20/99
`
`Try Winproxy you can download it at http://www2.winproxy.com/
`
`I haven't used it myself, but a friend I work with swears by it.
`
`Pete
`
`tab...@pitt.edu wrote:
`
`> 2 of my friends and I are planning to get cable modems (provided by Road
`> Runner) in our apartment. Now, Road Runner says that we need to get a
`> hub in order to share our internet access for our 3 computers; however,
`> they also said that we need to pay an extra $10 per user so that we do
`> not need to take turns using the access (i.e. if we pay for access on
`> one computer, they say we cannot share it using the hub).
`
`>>
`
` My question is whether my friends and I really can share only one
`> connection all at the same time. Granted it will be slower, but we do
`> not want to pay an extra $20 per month on cable modems. If so, what
`> software is required?
`
`>>
`
` Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
`> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
`
`Jeff Kowalke
`
`7/21/99
`
`<tab...@pitt.edu> wrote in message news:7n106u$i2c$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
`
`https://groups.google.com/forum/
`
`

`

`cable modem networking - Google Groups
`Page 3 of 25
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 17 of 60 PageID #: 43131
`
`
`
`
`
`> 2 of my friends and I are planning to get cable modems (provided by Road
`> Runner) in our apartment. Now, Road Runner says that we need to get a
`> hub in order to share our internet access for our 3 computers; however,
`> they also said that we need to pay an extra $10 per user so that we do
`> not need to take turns using the access (i.e. if we pay for access on
`> one computer, they say we cannot share it using the hub).
`
`>>
`
` My question is whether my friends and I really can share only one
`> connection all at the same time. Granted it will be slower, but we do
`> not want to pay an extra $20 per month on cable modems. If so, what
`> software is required?
`
`>>>
`
` Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
`> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
`
`I would argue that all you need is a hub (4 port for $29.00 available
`from CompUsa or the like) and additional Network Interface Cards
`for the other two computers. Just set all of your computers up and
`have them use identical TCP/IP settings (unless your IP address
`is hardcoded). The assumption here is that your cable
`modem settings are: "let the server assign my ip address" or
`otherwise known as DHCP.
`
`If the cable company has assigned you a permanent IP address,
`you will need to set up the proxy server as described in the other
`notes.
`
`Jerry Mendes
`
`tab...@pitt.edu wrote:
`
`7/24/99
`
`> 2 of my friends and I are planning to get cable modems (provided by Road
`> Runner) in our apartment. Now, Road Runner says that we need to get a
`> hub in order to share our internet access for our 3 computers; however,
`> they also said that we need to pay an extra $10 per user so that we do
`> not need to take turns using the access (i.e. if we pay for access on
`> one computer, they say we cannot share it using the hub).
`
`>>
`
` My question is whether my friends and I really can share only one
`> connection all at the same time. Granted it will be slower, but we do
`> not want to pay an extra $20 per month on cable modems. If so, what
`> software is required?
`
`>>
`
` Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
`> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
`
`It may be obvious to you if you're a sophisticated user, not so if you're
`new with minimal technical knowledge. What the cable company is saying is
`that you're only allowed one IP address active at any time. If you need
`more than one IP address (for the other computers), then you pay for each
`additional one.
`
`Craig Weisner's answer gets around the problem by letting the cable modem
`see only one IP address. The other machines send through it, masquerading
`multiple connections by having everyone use the single IP address assigned
`by the cable modem to the "gateway" machine. It does an internal
`translation of IP addresses for each of the client systems, so that you can
`have two, three, or more machines masquerading as one.
`
`--
`________________________________________________________________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`https://groups.google.com/forum/
`
`3/7/2016
`
`

`

`cable modem networking - Google Groups
`Page 4 of 25
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 502-1 Filed 03/08/18 Page 18 of 60 PageID #: 43132
`
`Jerry Mendes, Principal Consultant
`men...@nospam.datacomm-insights.com
`DataComm Insights Phone: (415)
`381-5500
`150 Seminary Drive FAX: (415)
`381-5502
`Mill Valley, CA 94941-3161
`USA
`
`
`
`mg...@my-deja.com
`
`7/29/99
`
`The question I have then, if my cable modem ISP (MediaOne Roadrunner
`Service in Southeastern Michigan) will only allow us to purchase one IP
`address, do I have to have 2 NIC cards in one of my computers in order
`to share that IP address with my small home LAN? There is no way I can
`just run the line into the hub's uplink, and then run from my computers
`into the hub? I was really hoping that was possible, as I have quite
`an IRQ problem in what would be my server, and it will be difficult to
`get another card working in it.
`
`Also, what sort of performance hit does running one of those Wingate
`type programs generate? I have an older machine that I could put a
`couple NICs into, but it is only a P233. The most preferable solution
`would be getting by with the hub and one card in each machine, if
`anyone can give me some pointers I would greatly appreciate it.
`
`In article <379A3E5A...@no-spam.datacomm-insights.com>,
`
`- show quoted text -
`
`Rick Young
`
`8/22/99
`
`I've been wrestling with my Roadrunner connection and I discovered that if
`two computers are hooked to a hub and from there into the Roadrunner cable
`modem, the LAST computer to connect will have the connection. I've used the
`winipcfg program (Enter winipcfg at the Run prompt) to "re-grab" the
`connection. So, if you're going to be using one of the computers in your
`apartment at the same time then you don't have to do anything except
`occasionally use winipcfg to re-grab the connection. Hope