Pooanm wrote:
> Yes i need both Isps as both have downtimes, so i can
> shift over using batch file NETSH command.
What about getting a router/firewall like one of the newer Sonicwalls that
supports load balancing and redundancy/dead link detection failover? That
way, you can flatten your internal network & not have to play around with
scripting stuff.
> Domain i
> havntused atall. Do i need win2003? i can get it. or even
> 2k advanced server.
You need either W2k or W2k3 server to set up a domain....might as well get
W2003, and also might want to pick up some books on AD/DNS etc before you
embark. I'd suggest getting decent server hw with hardware RAID and enough
disk space to store all your company's data centrally. A server is not
something to skimp on :-)
> I can do R&D myself. Just suggest.
> Thanks.
No prob - hope this helps.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> Ouch. This sounds like a real admin nightmare. I wouldn't use ICS,
>> and do you really need both cable & DSL? Get a decent
>> router/firewall to share the Internet connection, put everyone on
>> the same IP network
> & be done with it.
>> With 12 computers I'd also say it may be time for a
> domain model. Workgroups
>> with more than a tiny handful of computers are a real pain.
>>
>> Poonam Desai wrote:
>>> I have 12 2k pro.
>>> 8 off 12 are in office downstairs and 4 are in in another
>>> office upstairs.
>>> Both these network have 2 win2k pro with ICS enabled to
>>> serve respective nodes.
>>> There are two ISPs, one cable network for 8 machines
>>> downstais and second DSL for 4 machines upstairs.
>>> There is a print server downstairs and the server (for 3
>>> machines upstairs ) needs to print using the same printer.
>>> Here goes the structure of my network.
>>>
>>> 2 main cables coming from ISP, go directly into a cisco
>>> switch. All 8 + 1 ( Servers LAN Cable) cables of
> network A
>>> go in the same switch.One cable from Switch goes to
>>> Network B's server's first NIC which is shared and has IP
>>> 61.xx.xx (DSL's given IP.) The LAN of this server goes
>>> into a hub where remaining 3 machines meet up.
>>> IP of DSL server is 61.xx.xx.xx
>>> IP for LAN for DSL is 192.168.0.1
>>> Ip of Cable server that serves 8 machines is 172.16.0.145.
>>> IP of LAN for cable server is 10.0.0.1.
>>>
>>> To print from DSL's server to the print server on Network
>>> A , i gave additional IP to DSL's server 10.0.0.25 with
>>> same subnet. On doing this everything worked fine for 20
>>> minutes. Then 3 nodes under 61.xx.xx.xx lost connectivity
>>> with 61.xx.xx.xx and internet. As soon as i removed
>>> additional IP from 61.xx.xx.xx, nodes were able to connect
>>> again. I figured i will have to install a third NIC in
>>> DSL's server and plug it into the switch with IP
>>> 10.xx.xx.xx so that it will see Network A's print server.
>>>
>>> Again! on doing this, everything worked fine for 10
>>> minutes..and when connection got idle, DSL's server was no
>>> longer able to connect to the print server. After reboot
>>> it connected and then again lost connectivity once it got
>>> idle.
>>>
>>> So i tried to remove 10.xx.xx series from entire network
>>> and made everything 192.xx.xx.xx
>>>
>>> I gave Network A's server 192.168.0.111, gave Ips to 7
>>> machines 192.168.0.112,113,114 all with gateway
>>> 192.168.0.111
>>>
>>> DSL's server with Jumper LAN and MAIN 3 NICs were given
>>> IPs as
>>>
>>> MAIN 61.xx.xx.xx which is shared for LAN (192.168.0.124)
>>>
>>> LAN 192.168.0.124 (which is pluged into a hub and has
>>> nothing to do with anything other than those 3 machines
>>> that it serves.)
>>>
>>> Jumper 192.168.0.123 (Which is pluged into switch )
>>> COOL! worked fine for 20 minutes. Loss of connectivity
>>> once network gets idle. And normal after reboot.
>>> (Rebooting DSL's server solves the problem )
>>> if i ping 192.168.0.111 ( network A's server) from
>>> 61.xx.xx.xx Which has another 2 cards with
> 192.168.0.123 (
>>> Jumper) and 192.168.0.124 (LAN) it LOOKS for 192.168.0.111
>>> over LAN and not the JUMPER cable. It should look for
>>> 192.168.0.111 using 192.168.0.123 because cable of that
>>> NIC is pluged into the switch. But instead it looks for
>>> 192.168.0.111 using NIC that has been assigned
>>> 192.168.0.124 ( i figured this out by keeping an eye on
>>> sent received packets.)
>>>
>>> This is getting very complicated now. Need help from some
>>> one who knows how emotional packets are and where would
>>> they go on doing what.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>> .
|
Similar Threads
