IPX/SPX was designed primarily for LANs. It could talk across IP networks with a IP/IPX translation router, or thru tunneling services like Khali.

IIRC, if you dialed another PCs analog modem, and you were both using IPX/SPX, that would work.

There are a litany of reasons why IPX/SPX fell out of favor for TCP/IP, but I will admit, it kicked ass on the LAN side (especially Netware networks)

ElecticMonk: What does that contribute to the question ?

pyzaist: if your router forwards port 213 to your PC then it should work in theory.

http://yang-online.com/ supports DOS games by using DOSBox. Makes things easier to set up...

This seems odd to me. 192.168.1.1 gets me to one router, while 192.168.2.1 gets me to another. I've never noticed this. If I go to my public IP address, it goes to the 2.1 one, but the 1.1 has my computer in its list of devices. How can there be two routers?

Qbix wrote:

ElecticMonk: What does that contribute to the question ?

pyzaist: if your router forwards port 213 to your PC then it should work in theory.

Because the OP stated that "no one can connect to anyone's server if they aren't on the LAN". That's because IPX/SPX was designed with LANs in mind. When I dealt with Netware 4x/5x networks, in order to talk to remote sites across a WAN link, we had to use a IPX to IP translator (reverse on the receiving end). I thought I was merely pointing out for the OP why it works fine on the LAN.

I have no idea how DOSBox handles IPX, and I probably never will, since it's a dead protocol, and I only mess with it in GNS3/Virtualbox labs now.

I'll shut up now...

Dosbox transfer IPX Traffic over TCP/IP.

Sammy wrote:

Dosbox transfer IPX Traffic over TCP/IP.

So it encapsulates IPX within IP frames? Good to know. Does that result in "giant frames" ala ISL trunking?

Everyony with a Router has 2 IP-Adresses:

A private IP (192.168.x.x) and a Public IP (for Example 55.66.55.77)

You musst Forward the Port 213 in UDP Mode to the privte IP where the DOSBOX IPX Server is Runnning.

For Example Router is 192.168.1.1 and PC is 192.168.1.5, so Forward Port 213 to 192.168.1.5.

The Player who conntects musst conntect to the Public IP of ther Person who runs the Server.
In this Example 55.66.55.77

ElectricMonk wrote:

Sammy wrote:

Dosbox transfer IPX Traffic over TCP/IP.

So it encapsulates IPX within IP frames? Good to know. Does that result in "giant frames" ala ISL trunking?

Don't Know how it works in Special.
I only Know that you have to enter the IP Adress of the Server to Connect.

pyzaist wrote:

This seems odd to me. 192.168.1.1 gets me to one router, while 192.168.2.1 gets me to another. I've never noticed this. If I go to my public IP address, it goes to the 2.1 one, but the 1.1 has my computer in its list of devices. How can there be two routers?

Maybe you have a Cablemodem with Router and then a Second Standalone Router ?

i think then you must Forward The Port 213 in the First Router to the Second Router.

And In the Second Router to Your PC.

Sammy wrote:

Everyony with a Router has 2 IP-Adresses: […]
Show full quote

Everyony with a Router has 2 IP-Adresses:

A private IP (192.168.x.x) and a Public IP (for Example 55.66.55.77)

You musst Forward the Port 213 in UDP Mode to the privte IP where the DOSBOX IPX Server is Runnning.

For Example Router is 192.168.1.1 and PC is 192.168.1.5, so Forward Port 213 to 192.168.1.5.

The Player who conntects musst conntect to the Public IP of ther Person who runs the Server.
In this Example 55.66.55.77

Like i said, IPX is being encapsulated (or "tunneled") via UDP/IP:213. Kinda like how we used to use translation routers back in the Netware days, only less fancy. Makes sense to forward that port to the private IP.

The reason I was asking about giant frames, is if I used ISL trunking on cisco switches, instead of dot1q, it encapsulates the original frame within and ISL frame, resulting in "giants". Dot1q just adds a 32-bit shim and recalculates the CRC, so it results in a standard sized frame. I deal with that often, so I'm nerdy about things like that. I was just idly curious if the router would report the frames coming in on UDP 213 as giants or not.