NetBios Over TCP/IP

[Fred Jacobowitz]

Is NetBios Over TCP/IP required for accessing computers in the same
'workgroup' if they are all running Windows XP or VISTA?

Secondly, if it possible to see all the computers in the 'workgroup' if they
are 'hung' off of different routers. Instead of using a switch to extend
the number of ports on my router I used another router. I don't believe the
protocol is can traverse the routers?

Thank you
Fred Jacobowitz

 

[John Wunderlich]

Is NetBios Over TCP/IP required for accessing computers in the
same 'workgroup' if they are all running Windows XP or VISTA?

According to article:

<http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itsolutions/network/deploy/depovg/tcpip2k.mspx#EKQAG>

NetBios Over TCP/IP (NetBT) is not required if you can use Direct
Host TCP.

Secondly, if it possible to see all the computers in the
'workgroup' if they are 'hung' off of different routers. Instead
of using a switch to extend the number of ports on my router I
used another router. I don't believe the protocol is can traverse
the routers?

Broadcasting will only discover computers on the same subnet. It is
possible to include workstations on different subnets but you will
need a WINS server (NetBT), a DNS server, or entries in the
"lmhosts" file to resolve hosts outside the local subnet.

HTH,
John

 

[Brian A.]

Is NetBios Over TCP/IP required for accessing computers in the same 'workgroup' if
they are all running Windows XP or VISTA?

In XP no, don't know about Vista.

Secondly, if it possible to see all the computers in the 'workgroup' if they are
'hung' off of different routers. Instead of using a switch to extend the number of
ports on my router I used another router. I don't believe the protocol is can
traverse the routers?

You don't mention which routers, yet it should still be possible.

Connect modem to router A configured for DHCP and as the Gateway w/IP 192.168.1.1.
(Change, or use IP as suggested by your router manual.)
Connect an ethernet cable from a port on router A to a port on router B. It "may be"
necessary if present to use the uplink port on router A and/or a crossover cable.
Disable DHCP in router B. Not 100% sure, but it may be necessary to set the IP to
192.168.1.2, use the next IP inline after router A's IP.
Once DHCP is disabled in router B, IIRC you will not be able to access it's web
configuration anymore unless you reset it to the default configuration, which will
enable DHCP again and kill router B as a switch. To use as a switch again you will
have to disable DHCP.


--

Brian A. Sesko { MS MVP_Shell/User }
Conflicts start where information lacks.
http://basconotw.mvps.org/

Suggested posting do's/don'ts: http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
How to ask a question: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

 

[Fred Jacobowitz]

Brian,

I connected the new router to the old router using a crossover cable. I
also changed the IP address as you suggested. I can now access my other
computers connected to the second router. I don’t understand why I can not
access the web server on the second router. I know the address. I see it
as an attached device in my first router. How come?



Inquiring minds want to know.

Thank you,

Fred Jacobowitz

 

[Brian A.]

You do mean router B's web configuration, not web server, correct?
My best guess as I am not really sure, is because it is only being used as a switch
and not a DHCP server when you disable DHCP. If you enabled DHCP you would be able
to get into the web configuration but it will screw with the LAN when piggybacked to
another router.

--

Brian A. Sesko { MS MVP_Shell/User }
Conflicts start where information lacks.
http://basconotw.mvps.org/

Suggested posting do's/don'ts: http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
How to ask a question: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

 

[q_q_anonymous]

Brian,

I connected the new router to the old router using a crossover cable. I
also changed the IP address as you suggested. I can now access my other
computers connected to the second router. I don't understand why I can not
access the web server on the second router. I know the address. I see it
as an attached device in my first router. How come?



Inquiring minds want to know.

Thank you,

Fred Jacobowitz

test what Brian said. I think he meant that when you turn the DHCP
server off, the Web server goes off.
(so now it's a router and swtich but not a web server or a dhcp server)
actually, er, that was wrong. It's as Brian says, it's just a switch as
i'll explain later.

Go to a computer on Router B, and try to access Router B's web server.
If you cannot access it, then he's right.

Now why would it be that when the DHCP server is turned off, the web
server turns off?

Perhas there isn't much to configure

Here's an answer that's probably right, based on what Brian said.
If it's not operating as a router anymore either. It's only operating
as a switch. And this would make sense, because Router b only need
operate as a switch. Then the built in firewall is not needed. Port
forwarding is not needed - NAT is not used. All te things that one
would use the web interface to configure, are not needed.
What factors are configured-
-DHCP
-firewall
- port forwarding/NAT

if it's only acting as a switch , then the latter 2 factors are not
used. And if DHCP is off, then the first factor is not used.
So, maybe then it has the sense to turn off the web interface. Rather
than have it on with everything disabled!

By the way. So you got to the web interface and disabled DHCP. Now if
you wanted to reenable it, what would you do?

By the way, this is all assuming you couldn't access the router B web
server, from a comp on router B. If you can from a comp on Router B
but can't access it from a comp on Rotuer A, that *may* be for other
strange reasons I don't know of - since it's on the same subnet it
should work.