Wireless and Crossover co-operation

Discussion in 'Home Networking' started by Juan Hanglow, Oct 28, 2005.

  1. Juan Hanglow

    Juan Hanglow Guest

    I run a wireless system, consisting a desktop (SP Home) and a notebook (SP
    Pro)

    I have installed a crossover cable to permit faster transfer of files but
    cannot get both systems to run at once. Either must be disabled before the
    other will run.

    Is this normal or are there a other setting to get co-operation.

    regs
    dj
     
    Juan Hanglow, Oct 28, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Juan Hanglow wrote in
    dju5rv$evu$-infra.bt.com:
    TCP/IP gets very confused if there is more than one means of sending traffic
    between the two PCs - the wireless route and the wired route. You'd think
    that traffic would be sent over both routes and the once with the faster
    response time would "win", maybe even teaching TCP that that is the route to
    concentrate on sending traffic over in future - but it doesn't seem to work
    that way.

    I think that I'd expect that you would have to disable one route or the
    other (eg by disabling either the LAN or wireless adaptor on one of the two
    PCs).

    I have experienced something similar. My main PC is connected by cable to my
    router. My laptop is normally connected by wireless, but if I want extra
    speed for large PC-to-PC transfers I connect it to the router by cable. If I
    do this, I must remember to unplug the wireless adaptor (USB) first,
    otherwise neither connection works. The main PC can ping the laptop, because
    I must choose either the LAN or wireless IP, but ambiguous comms (eg using
    the laptop's computer name, as in "net view \\laptop" or "net use
    \\laptop\c" or the Windows Explorer equivalents) fail to find the laptop
    when executed on the main PC. Similarly for "ping main" or "net view \\main"
    executed on the laptop because these are ambiguous.
     
    Martin Underwood, Oct 29, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Juan Hanglow

    Juan Hanglow Guest

    Thanks Martin, I thought as much.
     
    Juan Hanglow, Oct 29, 2005
    #3
  4. No it doesn't. I suspect the problems is that both the wired and wireless
    networks have the same (default) IP address range.
    TCP doesn't choose routes. With luck the naming protocol Windows uses will
    do the right thing. Otherwise, since ad-hoc wireless can't be bridged it
    then get very complicated.
    Strange, that works here. But it's rather pot-luck which interface is used.
     
    Timothy Baldwin, Oct 29, 2005
    #4
  5. Timothy Baldwin wrote in
    djvk0s$35t$2surf.net:
    Is that a problem? So are you saying that even though the wireless and wired
    adaptors have different IP addresses, the fact that they are both in (for
    example) 192.168.1.x would cause problems? Given that this is how you'd
    normally set up a network - alternative means of connecting one computer to
    a network - then that's TCP (and/or services that use TCP) failing to cope
    with that situation. If you have two totally different subnets for the two
    adaptors, then there's only one route to any given IP address, but if both
    adaptors are in the same subnet then you've got ambiguity: the same remote
    IP can be rwached by two different adaptors. That's what I meant by "TCP/IP
    gets very confused if there is more than one means of sending traffic
    between the two PCs".

    In the specific case that the OP mentioned, he could have both PCs wireless
    adaptors in 192.168.0.x and both his wired adaptors in 192.168.1.x because
    the wired network is totally private to those two PCs, but that's a special
    case.
     
    Martin Underwood, Oct 29, 2005
    #5
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.