Re: Best Config for LAN
- From: "Bill Grant" <not.available@online>
- Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 09:24:35 +1100
You just give the server the same gateway as the other machines. A bridge
is essentially a passive link. It just forwards what comes in one side out
the other. From a networking point of view it is all just one segment. The
machines behave as if they were in the same segment. They communicate
between themselves directly using hardware addresses (no routing) and send
all other traffic to the default router.
If you cannot ping between machines, check that you are not blocking
ICMP echo with the built-in firewall.
"Terry" <it@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ujpj2$A$GHA.360@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks for the advice Bill,
With the router at .0.1, the setup I trialed was:
XP wireless NIC at .0.2, XP wired NIC at .0.4.
Server wired NIC at .0.5
Bridged the XP wireless and wired NIC's, gave the bridge .0.6
This gave me connectivity from the server to the bridge.
I guess the config of gateway and DNS would be the place to look.
wireless .0.2 gateway and DNS .0.1
wired .0.4 gateway and DNS .0.1
bridge .0.6 gateway and DNS .0.1
Not too sure about how to set the gateway and DNS for the server side.
Regards
Terry
"Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message
news:O5zJly9%23GHA.1224@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
ICS has nothing to do with bridging. ICS is a cut-down version of a
NAT router. The two NICs of an ICS machine must be in different IP
subnets, and the client machines must use the ICS machine's private IP
(which is set by ICS to 192.168.0.1) as the default gateway.
You could not use ICS with your setup anyway. ICS sets the "private"
NIC to 192.168.0.1 , and that subnet is already in use for your existing
subnet. You can't have both sides using the same IP subnet.
With a bridge, traffic is simply forwarded from one segment to the
other. The two segments operate as if they were one single network.
"Terry" <yoo_hoo_2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23YyTkq7%23GHA.3312@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi Bill,
Nearly got there with that setup. The Router sits at .0.1, I have the XP
machine with .0.2 for the wireless NIC and .0.4 for the wired NIC. The
server has .0.5 for the wired NIC.
I bridged the two NIC's on the XP machine and gave the bridge .0.6 and
pointed the gateway and pri DNS to the Router. I could ping each way
between the server and XP NIC's and the bridge but couldn't get from the
server to the router. Although the wireless connectivity was still there
I also could not ping between XP and the router.
I'm guessing there is a little more to do here. I seem to recall from a
previous setup using ICS that the bridge ended up with the IP .0.1 which
had belonged to the NIC with the internet connection. That may be a
clue, but I will need to attempt that to prove it one way or the other.
Any static routes need considering?
Regards
Terry
"Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message
news:em2K4c6%23GHA.4704@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I would leave the server with just the gigabit wired NIC, give the
XP pro both wired and wireless NICs and bridge them. Connect the wired
NICs in the Pro and the server with your crossover cable. All NICs
(wired and wireless) would be in the 192.168.0 subnet. All machines
would use the wireless router as their gateway router. No need to use
ICS - the wireless router will already be doing NAT.
"Terry" <yoo_hoo_2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23JFcEN4%23GHA.3352@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi,
That would certainly work, however the reason for the wireless
connection is I would need about 20 meteres of Cat5e just to get to
the first machine, run outside the house and through an external wall.
Perfectly possible as I already have a couple of conduits through the
external walls, but it is far easier to have wireless.
However, my real question is how to configure the IP subnet/s to get
what I want.
Regards
"Frankster" <Frank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3JydnaaGtaOPN9nYnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Buy a wired/wireless router and hook the desktops directly to the
wired ports.
-Frank
"Terry" <yoo_hoo_2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:OZBigVt%23GHA.2408@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I will be installing a Win2K3 server into my Wireless LAN.
The current config is a Wireless Router at 192.168.0.1, XPpro at
192.168.0.2 and XPhome at 192.168.0.3.
The server will be physically next to the XPpro machine and I have a
chance to connect just these two with Fast Ethernet at 1 Gigabit via
crossover cat 5e. I can fit a wireless NIC to the server.
I want to keep the wireless connection on the XP machines for
internet connectivity, but am not sure about the best way to get
internet connectivity on the server. 1) Should I try and route thru
the XPpro with ICS enabled (change IP), or 2) fit a wireless card to
the server on the router subnet, and use another subnet range for
the Gigabit connection only? Either way I'm guessing there will have
to be some static routes setup on the router, server, or both.
Regards
Terry
.
- References:
- Best Config for LAN
- From: Terry
- Re: Best Config for LAN
- From: Frankster
- Re: Best Config for LAN
- From: Bill Grant
- Re: Best Config for LAN
- From: Bill Grant
- Re: Best Config for LAN
- From: Terry
- Best Config for LAN
- Prev by Date: Re: Lan to Lan VPN on windows 2003
- Next by Date: Re: winipcfg will not release or renew
- Previous by thread: Re: Best Config for LAN
- Next by thread: Re: Permissions question
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
