I have the parent server connected to the public network without
issue. its a 2008 database server running Hyper-V. but all the child
servers i make are unable to communicate wiht anyone outside of the
server or on the 192.168.1.* unroutable subnet. so anything on the
main public subnet is dead to them. despite the child servers
themselves haivng an ip and subnet mask on that subnet.

How have you configured the virtual networking? Are the vms on a virtual
network which is linked to the physical NIC in the host? It sounds like they
are in a virtual network which links to the host but not to the physical
network.

Machines on a private network must have a NAT router to enable them to
access the Internet.

If the vms are in a virtual network which is not linked to the physical
NIC, you will need to route the traffic through the host to access the
Internet. You could run RRAS as a NAT router in the host.

I prefer to have my vms isolated from the host (and route through a vm).
This is not possible in your case if they are using the database on the
host.

"NeonDemon" <neondemon@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0fcd3b4a-ff95-4021-bb2a-f0520275be21@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> I have the parent server connected to the public network without
> issue. its a 2008 database server running Hyper-V. but all the child
> servers i make are unable to communicate wiht anyone outside of the
> server or on the 192.168.1.* unroutable subnet. so anything on the
> main public subnet is dead to them. despite the child servers
> themselves haivng an ip and subnet mask on that subnet.

Hyper-V has three kinds of virtual networks: Internal, Private and External.
The Private network is ONLY available to VMs on that box. The Internal
network can connect to other VMs on the box, and to the parent itself. But
without something acting as a router, can not connect past the parent
(host). Only the External network type allows the VM to connect through the
physical NIC to the outside world.

It doesn't matter what IP address or subnet you choose for Internal or
Private virtual networks, if you connect your VM to these network types,
they won't be able to see the outside world without something acting as a
router. (So, for example, you could have an internal Private network, which
doesn't allow the VMs to see anything except other VMs attached to that
Private network, but if one of them has a second NIC, attached to an
External network, and is running RRAS or other NAT/router, then you would be
able to connect to an outside connection through that VM.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel


"NeonDemon" <neondemon@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0fcd3b4a-ff95-4021-bb2a-f0520275be21@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>I have the parent server connected to the public network without
> issue. its a 2008 database server running Hyper-V. but all the child
> servers i make are unable to communicate wiht anyone outside of the
> server or on the 192.168.1.* unroutable subnet. so anything on the
> main public subnet is dead to them. despite the child servers
> themselves haivng an ip and subnet mask on that subnet.

The VMS are linked to the physical nic. in that i selected the nic,
and that nic was turned into a virtuial switch and another connection
made automatically which i selected to be connected to the virtual nic
in the child.

On Sep 29, 8:31pm, "Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote:
> How have you configured the virtual networking? Are the vms on a virtual
> network which is linked to the physical NIC in the host? It sounds like they
> are in a virtual network which links to the host but not to the physical
> network.
>
> Machines on a private network must have a NAT router to enable them to
> access the Internet.
>
> If the vms are in a virtual network which is not linked to the physical
> NIC, you will need to route the traffic through the host to access the
> Internet. You could run RRAS as a NAT router in the host.
>
> I prefer to have my vms isolated from the host (and route through a vm).
> This is not possible in your case if they are using the database on the
> host.
>
> "NeonDemon" <neonde...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:0fcd3b4a-ff95-4021-bb2a-f0520275be21@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I have the parent server connected to the public network without
> > issue. its a 2008 database server running Hyper-V. but all the child
> > servers i make are unable to communicate wiht anyone outside of the
> > server or on the 192.168.1.* unroutable subnet. so anything on the
> > main public subnet is dead to them. despite the child servers
> > themselves haivng an ip and subnet mask on that subnet.

Just got done rebuilding the server. the VMS are connected to the
External NIC. (Intel(R) PRO/1000 ......... Adapter #2 - Virtual
Network) which was made after selecting the Intel pro/1000... in the
virtuial network manager from the dropdown under "External:" with that
connected to the virtuial machine and given a unique IP adress but
other wise the same info as on the host. i only have access to the
host and other VMS on the host. which is confusing because i did not
select private, i selected External. but its behaving like its
private... any ideas?



On Sep 30, 9:53am, NeonDemon <neonde...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The VMS are linked to the physical nic. in that i selected the nic,
> and that nic was turned into a virtuial switch and another connection
> made automatically which i selected to be connected to the virtual nic
> in the child.
>
> On Sep 29, 8:31pm, "Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote:
>
> > How have you configured the virtual networking? Are the vms on a virtual
> > network which is linked to the physical NIC in the host? It sounds likethey
> > are in a virtual network which links to the host but not to the physical
> > network.
>
> > Machines on a private network must have a NAT router to enable them to
> > access the Internet.
>
> > If the vms are in a virtual network which is not linked to the physical
> > NIC, you will need to route the traffic through the host to access the
> > Internet. You could run RRAS as a NAT router in the host.
>
> > I prefer to have my vms isolated from the host (and route through a vm).
> > This is not possible in your case if they are using the database on the
> > host.
>
> > "NeonDemon" <neonde...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:0fcd3b4a-ff95-4021-bb2a-f0520275be21@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com....
>
> > > I have the parent server connected to the public network without
> > > issue. its a 2008 database server running Hyper-V. but all the child
> > > servers i make are unable to communicate wiht anyone outside of the
> > > server or on the 192.168.1.* unroutable subnet. so anything on the
> > > main public subnet is dead to them. despite the child servers
> > > themselves haivng an ip and subnet mask on that subnet.

It could be a problem with the device driver for the physical NIC. Some
of them don't play well with the virtual switch software.

It could also be a problem with your physical switch. Some switch ports
will only allow one MAC address per port. This prevents any virtual machines
using the same switch port as the host, since each vm has its own MAC
address for its NIC.

"NeonDemon" <neondemon@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:50b43804-14dc-4e18-8786-8ce167f830cb@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> Just got done rebuilding the server. the VMS are connected to the
> External NIC. (Intel(R) PRO/1000 ......... Adapter #2 - Virtual
> Network) which was made after selecting the Intel pro/1000... in the
> virtuial network manager from the dropdown under "External:" with that
> connected to the virtuial machine and given a unique IP adress but
> other wise the same info as on the host. i only have access to the
> host and other VMS on the host. which is confusing because i did not
> select private, i selected External. but its behaving like its
> private... any ideas?
>
>
>
> On Sep 30, 9:53 am, NeonDemon <neonde...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The VMS are linked to the physical nic. in that i selected the nic,
>> and that nic was turned into a virtuial switch and another connection
>> made automatically which i selected to be connected to the virtual nic
>> in the child.
>>
>> On Sep 29, 8:31 pm, "Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote:
>>
>> > How have you configured the virtual networking? Are the vms on a
>> > virtual
>> > network which is linked to the physical NIC in the host? It sounds like
>> > they
>> > are in a virtual network which links to the host but not to the
>> > physical
>> > network.
>>
>> > Machines on a private network must have a NAT router to enable them to
>> > access the Internet.
>>
>> > If the vms are in a virtual network which is not linked to the physical
>> > NIC, you will need to route the traffic through the host to access the
>> > Internet. You could run RRAS as a NAT router in the host.
>>
>> > I prefer to have my vms isolated from the host (and route through a
>> > vm).
>> > This is not possible in your case if they are using the database on the
>> > host.
>>
>> > "NeonDemon" <neonde...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> >news:0fcd3b4a-ff95-4021-bb2a-f0520275be21@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > > I have the parent server connected to the public network without
>> > > issue. its a 2008 database server running Hyper-V. but all the child
>> > > servers i make are unable to communicate wiht anyone outside of the
>> > > server or on the 192.168.1.* unroutable subnet. so anything on the
>> > > main public subnet is dead to them. despite the child servers
>> > > themselves haivng an ip and subnet mask on that subnet.
>