correction below! I missed the .0. in the sco guest IP
Glenn

Glenn wrote:
>
> Bob Meyers wrote:
>> I'll bet I've got 10 hours tinkering trying to get my SCO vmware guest
>> to accept telnet connections.
>>
>> Using vmware NAT option:
>> vm server 192.168.160.15
>> virtual NAT setup
>> SCO guest = 172.16.62.128
>> virt gateway= 172.16.62.2
>> server virt = 172.16.62.1
>>
>> All outbound from SCO works great. I can access the internet from SCO
>> guest. I can telnet to SCO from the vmware-server host OK, just
>> 'telnet 172.16.62.128'. But I cannot telnet from any other host on the
>> LAN.
>>
>> I cannot find some vmware docs that explain how to access telnet on a
>> guest. Remote hosts can ping 172.16.62.1 OK, but not 172.16.62.128
>> (SCO). It could be I need to use a special port, but I don't know what
>> that is.
>>
>> There are no vmware tools for SCO, because SCO is unsupported and not
>> mentioned on the vmware website. I guess fallout from the SCO lawsuit:
>> everybody hates SCO and drops support.
>>
>> I think I am so close, maybe another 24 hours of experimenting and
>> I'll have it
>>
>> Has anyone else managed to telnet into an SCO guest on VMWare?
>>
>> Other than that, it is going very well, SCO apps are fast.
>>
>
> I have a 5.0.6 vm guest working fine. I used the bridged network option
> though not NAT. I just gave the SCO vm guest an unused IP on my real
> net and it works fine. It is visible to anyone with routing setup to my
> "real" subnet.
>
> vmhost
> ip 192.168.0.22
> gw 192.168.0.1
>

SCO vm
ip 192.168.35 <--missing 0 s/b 192.168.0.35
gw 192.168.0.1

>
> I have never used the NAT setup of vmware at all. I have always used
> bridged or private depending on what I was doing. I am unsure of how
> any host (except for the actual vm host) that is outside of the "vm NAT
> net" would be able to see the vm guests at all without some form of port
> forwarding. Is NAT not an outbound only gateway by default?
>
>
> Glenn