[Apologies for new thread instead of followup - somehow google's
servers failed on retrieve]
All this makes perfect sense, I guess if I want 2 nics on the same
subnet then I'm getting into load balancing etc. I'm just curious
what XP Pro has installed for me to use for any sort of management
along those lines.
But the big problem is this - these little SOHO routers (Dlink DI-624
for example) will NOT route from wireless to LAN unless they have a
modem connected! I thought I was going out of my mind - but they'll
gladly sell you a bridge/AP for just that purpose. And you can't add
some static route to do it at the IP level! So I've got a couple of
boat anchors that I'd surely like to use as APs. BTW - I've tried the
routers on separate subnets - same bad luck...
Buck
buckwheat wrote:
> wired: 10.2.1.5 subnet 255.255.0.0 gateway 10.2.1.1
> the other wireless: 10.2.1.6 subnet 255.255.0.0 gateway 10.2.1.1
>
> 10.2.1.1 (wireless1) is an 802.11b wireless router - but I can't reach
> it from the upstairs. So -
>
> I setup 10.2.1.3 (wireless2) which is an 11G wireless router. I can
> connect to this one, but the NIC won't even speak IP to it! (pings
> from the wireless card fail)
>
> I guess I just want to be able to choose which one is "active". In
> other words, I want to send data to the LAN via the wire, I can choose
> that NIC. If I want it to go wireless, I'd like to choose that NIC
> via wireless2.
>
Subnets are for choosing interfaces. If you want to send data via the
wire, use subnet1. If you want to send wireless, use subnet2.
For example
wired: ip 10.2.1.x subnet-mask 255.255.255.0 def-gw 10.2.1.1
wireless: ip 10.2.2.x subnet-mask 255.255.255.0 def-gw 10.2.2.1
Your wireless routers can route from wireless to wired and your
multi-homed host can choose wired or wireless based on IP address. The
only difference is your multi-homed host isn't routing.
--
Kent W. England, Microsoft MVP for Windows Security
|
Similar Threads
