There a simple answer to this question, but it has me baffled. I have three static IPs in my house. So far, three of each machine occupies one of the addresses and I could printers and files. Now I am adding a few machines, so I picked up a DLink Dl-604 broadband router and they get one of the statics and put one of the machines on the routers private IP range (192.168.xx). I can surf the web and e-mail and all of that machine no problem. What I can do is to abandon the machine or other means to share with them. Heres how the machines are set:

All have NetBEUI in addition to IP addressing.
All have Netbios over IP with a disability (net hacking security) all have the same workgroup 0.
name.
All permissions for others to use them (ie they worked before the change)

The WAN side of the DSL modem is plugged into the wall (duh!)
The LAN side of the DSL modem is connected to a crossing gate on an 8-port switch.
The WAN side of the router is connected to a port on the 8-port switch.
The LAN side of the router is connected to a port on the 8-port switch using a crossover cable.
The machine with the private IP connected to a port on the 8-port switch.
The machine with the private IP NetBEUI is set as primary protocol.
All other machines connected to the 8-port PS switch.

Thanks for insights.

Joe

A few questions like:

Can NetBEUI Cross off to another? It is not “driven” per se, but maybe its not the same as two devices connected to the same switch.

You're right!… well, halfway. I did right on the Win98 machines, but I didn't even realize that the Advanced->Advanced Settings menu was there in that folder! Thanks for teaching me something new! You were correct that TCP/IP was still checked off for both MSFPS and MS Networking.

Thanks for the new knowledge.

Joe
Your velcome! This is one of the things I uncheck on a Win2K Web Server, in my long-long security lockdown list.

You're right!… well, halfway. I did right on the Win98 machines, but I didn't even realize that the Advanced->Advanced Settings menu was there in that folder! Thanks for teaching me something new! You were correct that TCP/IP was still checked off for both MSFPS and MS Networking.

Thanks for the new knowledge.

Joe

Any Win9X PC's, you go into bindings under TCP/IP and uncheck MSFPS, etc.

Tried something just to see what would happen…. AND IT WORKS PERFECTLY!

On my STATIC (Routable) IP Machines (Win2k Pro) I was fiddling around with the TCP/IP configuration under network settings. Under advanced, there was something I'd never noticed before… a place to add ADDITIONAL IP addresses to the same NIC! I went ahead and added 192.168.0.95 and the appropriate subnet mask and VOILA! it all works perfectly!

I'm a little confused though, as I thought that a NIC could only be assigned a single IP… but I guess I'm pretty wrong about that! Anyway… even though I'm still doing my LAN file and print sharing with NetBEUI, it seems that Windows still wants the machines on the same logical network (subnet) of the IP protocol even when they are already on the same physical network.

I am also implementing the practice that knupt spoke about with the different display number (and hence port) for each machine running VNC.

Thanks everyone….. just thought I'd give this update since I had some success.

Joe

You know…. you're absolutly right!

I'm still curious why the NetBEUI isn't working…. but it's more a curiosity now instead of a necessity.

Thanks,

Joe

For the love of god man! TURN NETBIOS BACK ON!!

It is a $50 Router thta can put few computers with independent IPs in the DMZ Zone.

That's worth going for. It wouldn't help with PCanywhere (which I use sometimes for file transfer), but I could always just copy the files to the computer that was PCanywhere enabled and the get them from there.

Still doesn't help with file and print sharing though.

Thanks for the imput… I'm gonna give the VNC a try anyway!

Joe

If it works you have to make a decision whether you really need to use the two extera IPsThey aren't extra. I get into my machines via VNC and/or PCanywhere from remote locations. Since I can only port forward to a single machine, that isn't possible for these two machines unless I use static IPs.

Joe

For the heck of it, plug all computers behind the Router (don?t forget to enable DHCP on the private IP computers), and see if you get a functional Network.

If it works you have to make a decision whether you really need to use the two extera IPs (there is a known phenomenon that people tend to get obsessed with using free things even when it become unnecessary), or just stick with one IP and the Router.

Anyone back at work with any ideas?

Joe

Must be something your overlooking… not sure. It *should* work.

The DSL modem goes to the 8 Port switch. This is because I have 3 incoming static IPs. By hooking the modem into the switch, it makes the connection available to the router and the other two machines with static IPs.

The router's WAN side goes to the switch via a CAT5 straight cable… this is where the router makes it's connection to the modem and out to the internet.

The router's LAN side (one of the ports) goes to the switch via a CAT5 crossover cable. This is because I'm connecting a switch port to a switch port. I'm hooking the router's LAN side to the switch so that I can hook the private LAN computer's cable to the same switch (just to make sure that it's on the same "physical" net as the other machines.

The static IP machines are hooked to the switch via CAT5 cables.

The private LAN machine is hooked to the switch via CAT5 cable.

Everything is connected. Everything can ping everything. Everything has internet connectivity. The private machine get's its IP and DNS through DHCP from the router just fine.

The problem is that I can no longer share printers and files between the machine on the private LAN side and the other machines. I would understand this if I were doing file and print sharing via TCP/IP, but I've installed NetBEUI on all the machines and have made sure that their workgroup is the same. When all were static IP's on the same subnet, everything worked fine… the problem came only after going to a private range for the one machine.

NetBEUI is a non-routeable protocol, but it should always work as long as all of the machines are on the same physical network. I works just peachy on networks that don't even have IP addressing and shouldn't be effected by the IP's in this situation…. so I'm a little stumped. I've made sure that all the machines are physically cabled on the same switch, so the router (NetBEUI isn't routable anyway) isn't even in the loop for this protocol.

Anyone have any ideas?

Joe

I really hope that you got 2 8 port switches, and that the dsl modem are connected to one of them, and one cord are going out from that one to the wan port on the router, and after that you have connected the computers.

But it does seem like you have connected all computers (and dsl modem) to the same switch. Then you would need to connect a cable from the dsl modem straight to the router, and not through a switch.

What kind of router do you have? The DHCP server on the SMC barricade works great. I have had it 1,5 year and it haven't changed the IP of my main computer yet. It's not difficult for me at all to use DHCP on the router and then open ports to specific PC's.

On the private IP machine it's bound to NetBEUI… it's a Win98 machine. The others are Win2k. How do I bind File and Print sharing to a specific protocol on Win2k?

Joe

Joe

Related posts

• I will be able to have a home network with WinME and XP home run? [broadband router] [school thanks] (0)
• A network with DHCP server, public IP-Range Router and Private IP Range? [private ip range] [private ip addresses] (0)

We have a DHCP server and a pool of approximately 120 public IP addresses. The problem is that not enough.

What we have done is a wireless network (Belkin Pre-N) on the laptop users to provide private IP addresses. The chamber of the wireless router is also where we have 14 shared lab computers.

What I want to do is run these 14 shared computer lab with a private IP address of the router.

But, should I still be able to they access the servers and other computers that are in the public IP range.

Tried disabling the firewall and routers that do not port forwarding, work.

Tried 4899 (remote admin), 2967 (following server), 3389 (Terminal Services) but still no go.

Any Ideas?

The problem is that the computers in the new private network don't show up in the larger network, I can't access them remotely, can't manage them through active directory and norton corporate edition can't update their virus definitions.

The other issue of going to a private IP range for the entire network is that the department will be moving to a different building within a couple years so I just need a short term solution.
The only way that I can think of to do that is to change to an all private range IP address scheme. Routers are designed so that they do not send private IPs out into the public IP range. If you change completely over to a private IP scheme, then your routers will be able to distribute the private IPs all across the network perfectly fine and youll be able to do any sort of direct remote admining required.

Overhaul your network!

Warning: I never actually tried the above, so take my advice with a grain of salt

The problem is that the computers in the new private network don't show up in the larger network, I can't access them remotely, can't manage them through active directory and norton corporate edition can't update their virus definitions.

The other issue of going to a private IP range for the entire network is that the department will be moving to a different building within a couple years so I just need a short term solution.

Ahh, so now we get to the root of your trying to do. I don't think a soho router solution is going to work.

This is something we need to draw out and really understand the topology. Again, not trying to preach – but you have specific goals that can be layed out and a design/solution will fall right into place.

I'm a big picture kind of guy and if the goals are clearly defined a simply solution falls right behind it.

Depending on how the public IP's are given out, you may be able to have both a public and a private IP with 1 NIC. (I do this with a DSL line and the ISP's software)

Ultimately as mentioned above by the guru's it would be ideal for internal hosts to have private IP's unless otherwise necessary. I think that you would be commended by mentioning the problem and proposing a solution. But, if the boss is playing deaf, then an idea would be to have a script with netsh to change IP's from public to private on a double click for when u need to access those hosts. 2 NIC's is another solution to get you on the same subnet.

Hope this helps, please if I'm wrong in any way point it out, I'm always learning!
Best of luck and courage facing the analogue bosses !

The problem is that the computers in the new private network don't show up in the larger network, I can't access them remotely, can't manage them through active directory and norton corporate edition can't update their virus definitions.

The other issue of going to a private IP range for the entire network is that the department will be moving to a different building within a couple years so I just need a short term solution.

Anyways, if you have already setup the wireless router to pass out IPs from a pool of lets say 192.168.1.1-100, then *all* you have to do is this:
-connect the WAN port on the router to one of your other routers in your core(I assume youve already done this, for internet access)
-connect a nice 20 port switch to one of the LAN ports and hook up all other desktops to the switch(I assume youve already done this)
-turn on the DHCP server in the WLAN router and give it a pool of 192.168.1.1-100/24

At this point, all the laptops and desktops should be getting IP address, and you should be able to ping anywhere in the little network just fine

-turn on NAT

Once you have your NAT on, and all the other stuff correctly setup, you should be able to hit up the other servers with whatever you need.

If thats not working for you, do me a favor and do a tracert from one of the desktops/laptops to one of the servers.

PS – "But, I still need to be able to access them from the servers and other computers that are in the Public IP range" What do you mean by that? What type of access do you need to the desktops/laptops in the new private network?

Originally posted by: guy
It's part of a University Campus. The department has 128 IPs. Going to a completely private network would require loads of paperwork and take way too much time.

But its what you need to do rather than come up with a overly complicated, difficult and costly to support solution.

Not trying to preach here, but complicated = bad.

Agreed. The K.I.S.S. theory, learn it, live it, love it.

But its what you need to do rather than come up with a overly complicated, difficult and costly to support solution.

Not trying to preach here, but complicated = bad.

i can't have them all on a private range.

Why not?

Also, why can you not goto 10.*.*.* or 172.16.*.* or 192.168.*.*? Im sure that the second question will be answered by the first.

i can't have them all on a private range.

all the hosts should have private addresses. Then you can use NAT to direct what to go where if those hosts need connections made to them (ie server)

Related posts

• Sharing resources of Mixed (IP) networks w / NetBEUI [private ip range] [broadband router] (0)