Sharing Cable Connetion Through another computer

I have a microsoft base station (ethernet & wireless
combined) MN-500. My network works fine if I rout
everyone through the base station directly through the
cable modem. However, all the setups in XP say this is
not the best way to connect. So... I'm trying to connect
through one computer and have all the others share the
connection. My base station does not recognize the
connection if it does not come into the modem port
directly from the base station. Ie it does not like the
bridged connection and it does not operate if I join the
network and do not use the modem port.?????

I'm not following you Beth, but perhaps I can shed some light here anyway.

First, who suggested that the way you had it is not the way to do it--and
why?


Typically, you want to set it up (top being first in line, last being the
end of the data flow)
cable from source
cable modem
cat5 cable
router (base station)
cat5 cat5 cat5 etc
computer1 computer2 computer 3....etc

What you're talking about "sounds" like ICS or internet connection sharing.

This is not the preferred way to go when you add a router to the mix, since
ICS acts as a router.

When you set up ICS, you are turning your primary box into (basically a
router)--it handles Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol duties, Network
Address Transalation and internal routing. Since your base station is
already doing that, you are having a conflict with at least dual DHCP

Furthermore, your primary computer and your router are competing to be the
network gateway. Since your base station can act as a router/switch, there
is no need for ICS.








"Beth" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:165b01c4b2e5$956b5230$(E-Mail Removed)...
> I have a microsoft base station (ethernet & wireless
> combined) MN-500. My network works fine if I rout
> everyone through the base station directly through the
> cable modem. However, all the setups in XP say this is
> not the best way to connect. So... I'm trying to connect
> through one computer and have all the others share the
> connection. My base station does not recognize the
> connection if it does not come into the modem port
> directly from the base station. Ie it does not like the
> bridged connection and it does not operate if I join the
> network and do not use the modem port.?????

Thanks for the answer.. that helps alot and the way you
described the network is how I origianlly set my network
up. Cable modem => router=> computer, computer,
wireless....
What confused me is when I used the windows XP network
set up wizzard and told it what my configuartion was, it
threw up a big yellow caution warning, telling me that
this was not a safe way (each computer connecting directly
through a "gateway") to connect to the inernet. So... I
purchased a"Windows XP Home Networking" book that suggests
the safest way to configure a network is to use one main
computer as the gateway and use the "ICS" function. But
you were right, my router did not work in that
configuration at all.

Sounds like I can just ignore the Microsoft warning and
keep my current configuation. I was just trying to make
my network more secure. Thanks so much for the input!
>-----Original Message-----
>I'm not following you Beth, but perhaps I can shed some
light here anyway.
>
>First, who suggested that the way you had it is not the
way to do it--and
>why?
>
>
>Typically, you want to set it up (top being first in
line, last being the
>end of the data flow)
>cable from source
>cable modem
>cat5 cable
>router (base station)
>cat5 cat5 cat5 etc
>computer1 computer2 computer 3....etc
>
>What you're talking about "sounds" like ICS or internet
connection sharing.
>
>This is not the preferred way to go when you add a router
to the mix, since
>ICS acts as a router.
>
>When you set up ICS, you are turning your primary box
into (basically a
>router)--it handles Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
duties, Network
>Address Transalation and internal routing. Since your
base station is
>already doing that, you are having a conflict with at
least dual DHCP
>
>Furthermore, your primary computer and your router are
competing to be the
>network gateway. Since your base station can act as a
router/switch, there
>is no need for ICS.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>"Beth" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
message
>news:165b01c4b2e5$956b5230$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> I have a microsoft base station (ethernet & wireless
>> combined) MN-500. My network works fine if I rout
>> everyone through the base station directly through the
>> cable modem. However, all the setups in XP say this is
>> not the best way to connect. So... I'm trying to connect
>> through one computer and have all the others share the
>> connection. My base station does not recognize the
>> connection if it does not come into the modem port
>> directly from the base station. Ie it does not like the
>> bridged connection and it does not operate if I join the
>> network and do not use the modem port.?????
>
>
>.
>

safer...hmmm.

I can't say why that would be safer- other than perhaps the XP machine using
ICS acts as a NAT router--but then so does just about any current cable/dsl
router.

Assuming each machine has a firewall enabled, there is no difference.



<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:140101c4b396$4fc01070$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Thanks for the answer.. that helps alot and the way you
> described the network is how I origianlly set my network
> up. Cable modem => router=> computer, computer,
> wireless....
> What confused me is when I used the windows XP network
> set up wizzard and told it what my configuartion was, it
> threw up a big yellow caution warning, telling me that
> this was not a safe way (each computer connecting directly
> through a "gateway") to connect to the inernet. So... I
> purchased a"Windows XP Home Networking" book that suggests
> the safest way to configure a network is to use one main
> computer as the gateway and use the "ICS" function. But
> you were right, my router did not work in that
> configuration at all.
>
> Sounds like I can just ignore the Microsoft warning and
> keep my current configuation. I was just trying to make
> my network more secure. Thanks so much for the input!
> >-----Original Message-----
> >I'm not following you Beth, but perhaps I can shed some
> light here anyway.
> >
> >First, who suggested that the way you had it is not the
> way to do it--and
> >why?
> >
> >
> >Typically, you want to set it up (top being first in
> line, last being the
> >end of the data flow)
> >cable from source
> >cable modem
> >cat5 cable
> >router (base station)
> >cat5 cat5 cat5 etc
> >computer1 computer2 computer 3....etc
> >
> >What you're talking about "sounds" like ICS or internet
> connection sharing.
> >
> >This is not the preferred way to go when you add a router
> to the mix, since
> >ICS acts as a router.
> >
> >When you set up ICS, you are turning your primary box
> into (basically a
> >router)--it handles Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
> duties, Network
> >Address Transalation and internal routing. Since your
> base station is
> >already doing that, you are having a conflict with at
> least dual DHCP
> >
> >Furthermore, your primary computer and your router are
> competing to be the
> >network gateway. Since your base station can act as a
> router/switch, there
> >is no need for ICS.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >"Beth" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> message
> >news:165b01c4b2e5$956b5230$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> I have a microsoft base station (ethernet & wireless
> >> combined) MN-500. My network works fine if I rout
> >> everyone through the base station directly through the
> >> cable modem. However, all the setups in XP say this is
> >> not the best way to connect. So... I'm trying to connect
> >> through one computer and have all the others share the
> >> connection. My base station does not recognize the
> >> connection if it does not come into the modem port
> >> directly from the base station. Ie it does not like the
> >> bridged connection and it does not operate if I join the
> >> network and do not use the modem port.?????
> >
> >
> >.
> >

That configuration is only safer then no router. Having a router is
actually safer because the incoming packet doesn't have to be read by
any of the computers. Basically you are putting them one device behind
the Internet (This is a simplified version of what is being done).

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> Thanks for the answer.. that helps alot and the way you
> described the network is how I origianlly set my network
> up. Cable modem => router=> computer, computer,
> wireless....
> What confused me is when I used the windows XP network
> set up wizzard and told it what my configuartion was, it
> threw up a big yellow caution warning, telling me that
> this was not a safe way (each computer connecting directly
> through a "gateway") to connect to the inernet. So... I
> purchased a"Windows XP Home Networking" book that suggests
> the safest way to configure a network is to use one main
> computer as the gateway and use the "ICS" function. But
> you were right, my router did not work in that
> configuration at all.
>
> Sounds like I can just ignore the Microsoft warning and
> keep my current configuation. I was just trying to make
> my network more secure. Thanks so much for the input!
>

--
Please do not contact me directly or ask me to contact you directly for
assistance.

If your question is worth asking, it's worth posting.

If it’s not worth posting you should have done a search on
http://www.google.com/ http://www.google.com/grphp?hl=en&tab=wg&q= or
http://news.google.com/froogle?hl=en&tab=nf&ned=us&q= before wasting our
time.