Question about Hyper-V Networking


Recommended Posts

I want to run some VMs on Hyper-V with public IPs, and also want them on a local domain. I have the networking configured so that IP routing is enabled on the host, the internal adapter on the host has a static IP and subnet but no gateway. The adapter within the VMs are given different static IPs and the gateway is the IP of the host internal adapter. All works fine. I setup a second internal adapter and give each VM a 192.x.x.x address on the second adapter and set the DNS to the 192. address of the domain controller. They communicate fine and join the domain. After this they then lose connectivity with the outside world, could this be something to do with being on a domain/having different DNS addresses on each adapter within the VM?

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1061498-question-about-hyper-v-networking/
Share on other sites

Make sure the Hyper-V virtual network is set to external. Even when it's set to external it can still communicate via the host through it's proper IP address (the host). If you've got a DHCP server set up then let that assign the addresses then force those addresses to only be assigned to the VM's. If you configure it to internal only then it can only communicate within the actual host itself and not outside.

This is a hosted server with only 1 NIC and 1 main IP address, with an additional /28 IP range routed to the primary IP. The only way of getting an internet connection to the VMs is creating an internal only adapter, giving the Hyper-V adapter on the host the first usable IP address and subnet leaving the gateway and DNS blank. Then setting each VM to the next IP in the range and using the IP assigned on the host adapter as the gateway, and enabling the IP Router option in the host machine registry. It works exactly like having 2 real NICs, so it's not the way the Hyper-V networking is configured.

What I want to do is run a domain on a private adapter which has no internet connectivity on a 172.16.100.x range using the domain controller's DNS, and then give each VM a static public IP with external DNS servers (i.e. 8.8.8.8). The only problem I'm encountering is that all the internet traffic goes down the private (domain) adapter and not out through the one providing internet access. Here is an example of what I mean:

289llcy.png

These are what the 2 adapters look like (This has been edited so it doesn't show the actual public IP), the one on the left is the internet connection and one on the right is the domain network. Basically, all the internet traffic is going down the domain adapter. Is this due to having internal and external DNS servers specified, even though they're separate networks and is there any way around this? Do I need to do anything with DNS forwarders on the domain controller?

Any help much appreciated. :)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Lmao. Cries about not playing those games not installed and yet don't ever want to touch them.
    • If I want to merge folder trees that have a similar structure, Beyond Compare is always my first choice. It's not free but it's awesome. If I want to just scan a whole drive/folder and find duplicates that are taking up space, I like Czkawka.
    • Claude Code gets throttled as Anthropic rolls out fresh usage caps by David Uzondu Claude Code, the AI-in-terminal utility developed by Anthropic and launched back in February, is getting updated usage limits following weeks of user complaints about being abruptly cut off. Many developers on the "$200/month Max plan" found their access blocked after just a few requests, with no explanation from the company. In a recent thread posted to X, the AI lab explained that it has seen "unprecedented demand since launch," pointing to some of its heaviest users who were running the tool continuously in the background 24/7, with one person reportedly consuming tens of thousands of dollars in model usage on a single $200 subscription. Anthropic also claimed that some users were violating its usage policy by sharing and reselling accounts, which impacts system capacity for everyone. These factors all led the company to announce new weekly limits that will be added on top of the existing five-hour caps, effective August 28. Max plan subscribers will have the option to buy additional usage at standard API rates if they hit their cap. Here's what the new weekly limits look like: Pro Plan ($20/month): An estimated 40 to 80 hours of usage with the Sonnet 4 model. Max Plan ($100/month): An estimated 140 to 280 hours with Sonnet 4 and 15 to 35 hours with the top-tier Opus 4 model. Max Plan ($200/month): An estimated 240 to 480 hours with Sonnet 4 and 24 to 40 hours with Opus 4. Per TechCrunch, the company provided these hour-based estimates, noting that the actual numbers may vary based on the size of a project's codebase. What's interesting is how this new structure compares to the old marketing. Anthropic previously advertised its $200 Max plan as offering 20 times more usage than the Pro plan. Based on these new hourly estimates, that multiple is now closer to six. It is possible the 20x figure still applies when measured in tokens or raw compute, but, according to TechCrunch, the company has not clarified that point.
    • I don't give a rat's f### what Trumpette, the Putin puppet likes!
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      Gladiattore earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      Gladiattore earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NeoWeen earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • First Post
      Doreen768 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      644
    2. 2
      ATLien_0
      260
    3. 3
      Xenon
      165
    4. 4
      neufuse
      142
    5. 5
      +FloatingFatMan
      107
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!