| Home | Register | Members | Search | Links |
 |
| Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
Terry
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
| |
|
Frankster
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Buy a wired/wireless router and hook the desktops directly to the wired
ports. -Frank "Terry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:OZBigVt%(E-Mail Removed)... >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 > > > |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Terry
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed) ... > Buy a wired/wireless router and hook the desktops directly to the wired > ports. > > -Frank > > "Terry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message > news:OZBigVt%(E-Mail Removed)... >>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 >> >> >> > > |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Bill Grant
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:%23JFcEN4%(E-Mail Removed)... > 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message > news:(E-Mail Removed) ... >> Buy a wired/wireless router and hook the desktops directly to the wired >> ports. >> >> -Frank >> >> "Terry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >> news:OZBigVt%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>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 >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Terry
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
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%(E-Mail Removed)... > 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message > news:%23JFcEN4%(E-Mail Removed)... >> 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >> news:(E-Mail Removed) ... >>> Buy a wired/wireless router and hook the desktops directly to the wired >>> ports. >>> >>> -Frank >>> >>> "Terry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>> news:OZBigVt%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>>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 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Bill Grant
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:%23YyTkq7%(E-Mail Removed)... > 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%(E-Mail Removed)... >> 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >> news:%23JFcEN4%(E-Mail Removed)... >>> 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>> news:(E-Mail Removed) ... >>>> Buy a wired/wireless router and hook the desktops directly to the wired >>>> ports. >>>> >>>> -Frank >>>> >>>> "Terry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>>> news:OZBigVt%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>>>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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Terry
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
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%(E-Mail Removed)... > 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message > news:%23YyTkq7%(E-Mail Removed)... >> 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%(E-Mail Removed)... >>> 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>> news:%23JFcEN4%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>> 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>>> news:(E-Mail Removed) ... >>>>> Buy a wired/wireless router and hook the desktops directly to the >>>>> wired ports. >>>>> >>>>> -Frank >>>>> >>>>> "Terry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>>>> news:OZBigVt%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>>>>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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Terry
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi Bill,
Got it sorted, but had to do a couple more things first before I got full connectivity. Previously during my first attemp on creating the Bridge I noticed the wireless LAN speed had dropped to less than 54MB, whilst before it was better than 162MB peaking at 270MB. A bit of googling came up with the fix to Disable NetBIOS over TCP/IP in the Network Properties for the Bridge. That got the wireless speed back up to over 162MB. The other fix came from a similar source and was to force the adapters making up the bridge to promiscuous mode as per MS KB Q302348. Both NIC's showed 'unknown' as the compatability mode, setting them using ForceCompatabilityMode=Enable restored communications. That fixed the problem with the bridge not passing traffic. A quick test ping from the XPpro to the Server, Server to XPpro, and then Server to Router proved all was OK. Thanks for your help, I'm really glad I did not have to use ICS. Regards Terry "Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message news:O5zJly9%(E-Mail Removed)... > 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message > news:%23YyTkq7%(E-Mail Removed)... >> 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%(E-Mail Removed)... >>> 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>> news:%23JFcEN4%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>> 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>>> news:(E-Mail Removed) ... >>>>> Buy a wired/wireless router and hook the desktops directly to the >>>>> wired ports. >>>>> >>>>> -Frank >>>>> >>>>> "Terry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>>>> news:OZBigVt%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>>>>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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Bill Grant
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:ujpj2$A$(E-Mail Removed)... > 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%(E-Mail Removed)... >> 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >> news:%23YyTkq7%(E-Mail Removed)... >>> 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%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>> 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>>> news:%23JFcEN4%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>>> 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>>>> news:(E-Mail Removed) ... >>>>>> Buy a wired/wireless router and hook the desktops directly to the >>>>>> wired ports. >>>>>> >>>>>> -Frank >>>>>> >>>>>> "Terry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>>>>> news:OZBigVt%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>>>>>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 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Terry
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi Bill,
One last thing I had to do was choose Windows to control the wireless setup and get rid of the Netgear Wireless Assistant. I was getting that 'no supplicant...' message. Thanks for all your help. Regards Terry "Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message news:%23BwjRKH$(E-Mail Removed)... > You just give the server the same gateway as the other machines. A > bridge is essentially a passive link. It just forwards what comes in one > side out the other. From a networking point of view it is all just one > segment. The machines behave as if they were in the same segment. They > communicate between themselves directly using hardware addresses (no > routing) and send all other traffic to the default router. > > If you cannot ping between machines, check that you are not blocking > ICMP echo with the built-in firewall. > > "Terry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message > news:ujpj2$A$(E-Mail Removed)... >> 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%(E-Mail Removed)... >>> 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>> news:%23YyTkq7%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>> 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%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>>> 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>>>> news:%23JFcEN4%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>>>> 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>>>>> news:(E-Mail Removed) ... >>>>>>> Buy a wired/wireless router and hook the desktops directly to the >>>>>>> wired ports. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Frank >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Terry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:OZBigVt%(E-Mail Removed)... >>>>>>>>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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| how can I config pc3? | quitono | Wireless Networks | 6 | 08-12-2008 04:54 PM |
| Please help with VNC Config | johndoe@mtekusa.com | Linux Networking | 18 | 02-19-2006 02:47 PM |
| LAN and WAN config | pjl | Wireless Internet | 0 | 07-30-2005 07:31 PM |
| WAP Config | davesid | Wireless Internet | 1 | 05-29-2005 05:33 PM |
| IAS config | aravind | Windows Networking | 0 | 10-04-2004 12:14 PM |
Forum Software Powered by vBulletin®, Copyright Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2 ©2009, Crawlability, Inc. |
Linear Mode
