Communicating Across Network Ranges

Following some excellent advice from Alex Fraser in this group I now
have a home network running in the 192.168.1.n address range and a NAS
box connected directly to a second NIC on my server using addresses of
182.168.2.n.

It would be useful if I could communicate across these two networks to
(a) allow the NAS to set its time over the Internet and (b) allow the
NAS to send progress emails. To do this the NAS needs access to the
192.168.1.n address range.

Can anybody give me some pointers as to whether this is possible, or
links to what I need to Google for (I have tried network range,
address, communication etc. but am getting highly technical hits which
are beyond me). The server runs XP SP2, but could run Server 2003 if
that would be easier.

PS - If Alex spots this it seems my speed issues may have been due to
the back up s/w I was using, I am contacting the suppliers.

Many thanks :-)


--
Jeff Gaines
Damerham Hampshire UK
Using XanaNews 1.17.5.7 http://www.wilsonc.demon.co.uk/d9xananews.htm

"Jeff Gaines" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Following some excellent advice from Alex Fraser in this group I now
> have a home network running in the 192.168.1.n address range and a NAS
> box connected directly to a second NIC on my server using addresses of
> 182.168.2.n.
>
> It would be useful if I could communicate across these two networks to
> (a) allow the NAS to set its time over the Internet and (b) allow the
> NAS to send progress emails. To do this the NAS needs access to the
> 192.168.1.n address range.

If you have XP, the easiest and most flexible method is to bridge the NICs
on the server. This will effectively put the NAS box on the same network as
(probably) everything else - server, router, and any other machines.
Therefore, its IP configuration should be the same as needed if it was
plugged directly into the router. The NAS box will need an IP address in the
same range as the first NIC on the server, and for Internet access you will
need to configure a default gateway (the router) and DNS server too (the
router or your ISP's DNS servers). If you set the NAS box to use DHCP it
should pick up suitable configuration from the router. Because bridging the
connections on the server is like putting the NAS box on the same network as
everything else, other machines will be able to access it.

An alternative is to enable ICS on the server machine (to share the router
connection, ie the first NIC). This will force the second NIC in the server
to 192.168.0.1/255.255.255.0. Again, the NAS box will need its IP
configuration changing, but in this case to address 192.168.0.x, mask
255.255.255.0, default gateway 192.168.0.1, and DNS server 192.168.0.1 or
the router or your ISP's servers. As before, the NAS box should pick up
suitable configuration via DHCP - but in this case from the DHCP server
built into ICS.

Unlike bridging, using ICS will not allow you access to the NAS box from
machines other than the server (the same as machines behind any NAT router
can't be contacted from "outside", at least not without port forwarding).
You didn't specify this as a requirement but I guess it may be useful; if so
then bridging is obviously preferable.

There are guides for both of these on http://www.practicallynetworked.com/:
Bridge -
http://www.practicallynetworked.com/...workbridge.htm
ICS - http://www.practicallynetworked.com/sharing/xp_ics/

[snip]
> PS - If Alex spots this it seems my speed issues may have been due to
> the back up s/w I was using, I am contacting the suppliers.

That would be surprising, but I hope you get it sorted.

Alex

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, "Jeff Gaines"
(E-Mail Removed) says...
>
> Following some excellent advice from Alex Fraser in this group I now
> have a home network running in the 192.168.1.n address range and a NAS
> box connected directly to a second NIC on my server using addresses of
> 182.168.2.n.
>
> It would be useful if I could communicate across these two networks to
> (a) allow the NAS to set its time over the Internet and (b) allow the
> NAS to send progress emails. To do this the NAS needs access to the
> 192.168.1.n address range.
>
Why are the two running on different networks in the first place?

On 20/07/2005 Rob Morley wrote:

> Why are the two running on different networks in the first place?

The NAS is connected to a Gigabit NIC and the second (Realtek) NIC
connects to the network. My understanding is that using 2 NIC's in 1 PC
with the same address range causes severe problems?

--
Jeff Gaines
Damerham Hampshire UK
Using XanaNews 1.17.5.7 http://www.wilsonc.demon.co.uk/d9xananews.htm

On 20/07/2005 Alex Fraser wrote:

> > It would be useful if I could communicate across these two networks
> > to (a) allow the NAS to set its time over the Internet and (b)
> > allow the NAS to send progress emails. To do this the NAS needs
> > access to the 192.168.1.n address range.
>
> If you have XP, the easiest and most flexible method is to bridge the
> NICs on the server. This will effectively put the NAS box on the same


That's done it Alex, thanks once more :-)
I am now getting a stream of emails from my spare room telling me what
is happening on the server.


> > PS - If Alex spots this it seems my speed issues may have been due
> > to the back up s/w I was using, I am contacting the suppliers.
>
> That would be surprising, but I hope you get it sorted.


It's odd, SmartSync have replied to my email and I am re-trying with a
command line switch they have suggested.


--
Jeff Gaines
Damerham Hampshire UK
Using XanaNews 1.17.5.7 http://www.wilsonc.demon.co.uk/d9xananews.htm

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Jeff Gaines
says...
> On 20/07/2005 Rob Morley wrote:
>
> > Why are the two running on different networks in the first place?
>
> The NAS is connected to a Gigabit NIC and the second (Realtek) NIC
> connects to the network. My understanding is that using 2 NIC's in 1 PC
> with the same address range causes severe problems?
>
Not really. Used to be a way of getting more bandwidth on servers in ye
olden days.



--
Conor

-You wanted an argument? Oh I'm sorry, but this is abuse. You want room
K5, just along the corridor. Stupid git. (Monty Python)

"Conor" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) t...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Jeff Gaines
> says...
> > The NAS is connected to a Gigabit NIC and the second (Realtek) NIC
> > connects to the network. My understanding is that using 2 NIC's in 1 PC
> > with the same address range causes severe problems?
>
> Not really. Used to be a way of getting more bandwidth on servers in ye
> olden days.

This is misleading. You will have problems if any other hosts in the same
address range are accessible via only one NIC. This is true in the above.

Alex

On 20 Jul 2005 08:07:26 GMT, "Jeff Gaines"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>and a NAS
>box connected directly to a second NIC on my server

what's a NAS box ?

Phil
--
spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
Come on down !

On 20/07/2005 Phil Thompson wrote:

> On 20 Jul 2005 08:07:26 GMT, "Jeff Gaines"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > and a NAS
> > box connected directly to a second NIC on my server
>
> what's a NAS box ?
>
> Phil


Network Attached Storage, it's a Buffalo TerraStation with 1TB of HD in
it, connects via a network cable.

--
Jeff Gaines
Damerham Hampshire UK
Using XanaNews 1.17.5.7 http://www.wilsonc.demon.co.uk/d9xananews.htm

On 20 Jul 2005 16:18, Phil Thompson wrote:

>what's a NAS box ?

read up on NAS and SAN :-)

http://www.internet.com has its own "Enterprise Storage Forum" with a
newsletter by e-mail that might be of interest (now and then :-) PGM

--

UK ADSL <http://tinyurl.com/5jpa4> - Happy to save cash with Plus.Net!!