There is really no way to use the computer browser service in different
segments with workgroups.
The computer browser service uses Netbios names and network broadcasts
to build browse lists. Broadcasts only work in the same segment. It is
possible to have the browser service work across segments but that requires
a DC and WINS. Only a DC can build a network-wide browse list.
"Chris Patterson" <Chris
(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
message news:31445EA9-66AF-406E-8A34-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Ok, hopefully this is the correct area to post this in.
>
> I'm a network technician (CCNA cert) for a local business; a friend of
> mine
> is a manager at a local movie theater. They've been having some issues
> recently he wanted me to look at. So far I'm completely stumped. most of
> my
> day-to-day affairs deal with lower level network layers. This particular
> one
> seems to be dealing with upper layers (specifically resource sharing).
>
> Here's my problem:
>
> They are running a win 2003 server with dual ip addresses on the NIC. One
> of
> those networks communicates directly with their point-of-sale machines,
> the
> other is intended for the management pcs (running xp sp2) to communicate
> with
> the server (it also happens to be the network the internet gateway is on).
> All devices are showing the same workgroup ("PTMS").
>
> Both of their printers are connected to the server machine, and they
> wanted
> me to make those accessible to the other management pcs. That seemed easy
> enough, just a little sharing. The issue I'm having is that while both of
> the
> management PCs can see each other as workgroup PCs, and the server can see
> all of the POSs as workgroup PCs, the server can't see the management PCs
> or
> visa versa. They have layer 3 connectivity, but that seems to be where it
> stops.
>
> I don't know enough about windows workgroups, but is it possible that the
> server is only utilizing one of its networks for workgroup visibility? If
> so,
> is there a way to force it to use both, or create another workgroup for
> the
> other network? Maybe I'm way off and it's something else all together?
>
> Again, this has me completely stumped. Any help or advice would be very
> much
> appreciated. Thank you in advance.