Sampsa, Once they connect they can do a traceroute, get their address and pass it along to whomever at the other end. The configuration for either the bridge or Multinet is trivial. You can preconfigure the bridge and comment it out until a valid address is known, and with Multinet you can preconfigure the entry with a bogus entry (address invalid only) and apply the change when you have it. A quick reboot and you are all done. Do you think that their address will change more than once during this short event? -Steve Well static and static, but I mean there must be an IP address for configuration of our side as the original MULTINET stack's UDP tunnel does not to DNS lookups... Sampsa On 13 Jun 2010, at 16:07, Steve Davidson wrote: Actually, for this short duration, who cares about a static address. Fred and I use dedicated VS4000/VLC's as Multinet tunnel routers. We reboot as necessary and ignore everyone's complaints. SG1 actually has a script that deals with some of this automatically. If I have time today I may even finish it. It deals with the burden of changing the address entry in Multinet and reboots. Total turn-around is under 5 minutes, actually more like 3 minutes. I noticed that Johnny has made changes to the bridge. I do not have these changes. My version is different than his to begin with. Fred and I run my version but it could probably use Johnny's fixes. I'm now wondering if some of the "surprises" we have been running into have to do with these "fixes". Do either of you know? I have not approached Johnny about getting these changes. -Steve Yup, that's correct. Now we will need a static IP to make this work, unless we set up my end on a Linux box - the MULTINET Linux port knows how to look up hostnames, the original VMS one needs a static IP. Steve is right about the bridge and LAT however, we COULD set up the bridge as a backup and try the MULTINET tunnel as a primary method of connection. Sampsa On 13 Jun 2010, at 07:50, Mark Wickens wrote: I've been talking to Steve Davidson and it crossed my mind that if we use multinet to connect we won't need a separate unix box as we wouldn't require Johnny's bridge. Is that correct? Might be worth going through the motions if you have time, (a) to get the process documented and (b) to provide a good fallback strategy if option 1 using the bridge to connect through to you doesn't work. Regards, Mark.