2 Network Connections - How to Force Internet Explorer to use a Specific one

[allanc]

Here is my scenario:

We have a network of 10 computers and a server all connected to a
switch using ethernet.
The current connection to the Internet is 64k ISDN.
Cable modem and DSL are not available at this location.

I found a reasonably priced 'wireless' network provider and a signal is
available.
I would like to connect the output of this modem to the input of a
wireless router.
The next step would be to add USB based wireless adapters to some of
the workstations so that they can obtain faster access to the Internet.
In other words, 10 computers and the servers would be one network and
maybe 6 of the 10 would be wireless on another. These wireless
connections would only need to share the Internet connection but not
printers or other resources within their network.

Is it possible to configure Internet Explorer on just these 6 computers
to use the wireless connection (and not the wired) to access the
Internet. The other 4 computers would still use the wired connection
thru the switch? How would I accomplish this?

 

[DanS]

Here is my scenario:

We have a network of 10 computers and a server all connected to a
switch using ethernet.
The current connection to the Internet is 64k ISDN.
Cable modem and DSL are not available at this location.
64K....ouch!


I found a reasonably priced 'wireless' network provider and a signal is
available.
I would like to connect the output of this modem to the input of a
wireless router.
The next step would be to add USB based wireless adapters to some of
the workstations so that they can obtain faster access to the Internet.
In other words, 10 computers and the servers would be one network and
maybe 6 of the 10 would be wireless on another. These wireless
connections would only need to share the Internet connection but not
printers or other resources within their network.

Is it possible to configure Internet Explorer on just these 6 computers
to use the wireless connection (and not the wired) to access the
Internet. The other 4 computers would still use the wired connection
thru the switch? How would I accomplish this?

I don't know the purpose of having the wireless on some workstations.
Wireless is ALWAYS slower than wired, especially when you have more than
one wireless client on an access point. Why spend the money on the USB
devices ?

How is the ISDN line connected now ? To the switch ? With a router ?
These servers, are they domain controller, or just file servers with
mapped drives ?

The short answer (not knowing your full network configuration)is all you
would need to do is connect the new WISP device to the switch, and then
change the default gateway on the machines you want to use the WISP to
the IP of the WISP device. It can be on the same network as everything
else.

It's all in the default gateway setting.

DanS

 

[Guest]

I had a similar problem on a much smaller scale but I think the response I
got will work for your problem also. Check out "Windows XP Networking and
the Web" newsgroup, 10/30/06, 'Mixed Network Problem'. You would essentially
change the metric for the wireless connection on each of the six pc's (I only
had to do it twice). Then check that this change doesn't affect other stuff
like file sharing and printing; it did not cause a problem for me.

 

[allanc]

Wireless is ALWAYS slower than wired, especially when you have more than
one wireless client on an access point. Why spend the money on the USB
devices ?

How is the ISDN line connected now ? To the switch ? With a router ?
These servers, are they domain controller, or just file servers with
mapped drives ?

The short answer (not knowing your full network configuration)is all you
would need to do is connect the new WISP device to the switch, and then
change the default gateway on the machines you want to use the WISP to
the IP of the WISP device. It can be on the same network as everything
else.

It's all in the default gateway setting.

The output of the ISDN modem is the input to a hub. One of outputs of
the hub is input to a PC (required because of an applcation) and the
other is input to a SBS server (domain controller). The other NIC in
the server is input to a 24 port switch.
The reason for the USB wireless is because I did not think that the
switch could have 2 input Internet connections at dissimiliar speeds
(64k ISDN and 3 Mb wireless).

 

[allanc]

I had a similar problem on a much smaller scale but I think the response I
got will work for your problem also. Check out "Windows XP Networking and
the Web" newsgroup, 10/30/06, 'Mixed Network Problem'. You would essentially
change the metric for the wireless connection on each of the six pc's (I only
had to do it twice). Then check that this change doesn't affect other stuff
like file sharing and printing; it did not cause a problem for me.

Was the *reason* why you were attempting this the same as mine?
Maybe I am going about trying to increase their Internet bandwidth
using the wrong methodology.

 

[DanS]

The output of the ISDN modem is the input to a hub. One of outputs of
the hub is input to a PC (required because of an applcation) and the
other is input to a SBS server (domain controller). The other NIC in
the server is input to a 24 port switch.
The reason for the USB wireless is because I did not think that the
switch could have 2 input Internet connections at dissimiliar speeds
(64k ISDN and 3 Mb wireless).

I'm not familiar with ISDN at all. ISDN never went over the way they
thought it was going to.

Now, from what I gather from your description, the Domain Controller is
between the 'rest' of the network and the ISDN access device ?

ISDN ---> HUB ---> Server ---> 24 Port Switch

Then the hub has another PC on it, and the rest of the PC's are connected
to the switch. The server is configured to do some type of NAT ? The PC's
have the server IP as it's default gateway/DNS ? Is the DC doing
firewalling/access control and/or proxy server as well ?

That is the biggest issue. If the DC is providing those functions, then
it is more difficult to do the setup.

Yes, you can have more than one internet connection available on a
switch. You can have 4 DSL/Cable modems w/4 routers. You can uplink the
LAN side on each router into the same switch. As long as the LAN
interface on each of those 4 routers is on the same subnet, and not
identical, like 192.168.1.1, .2, .3, .4, any PC on that subnet hooked
into that switch can use any of those connections. All it would take is
to change the default gateway to the specific router/cable modem you
wanted to use.

With your situation it really depens on what you are/want to do with the
DC. Setting the DC aside, the WISP device's router's LAN port can be set
to the same subnet as the rest of the LAN, and uplinked into the switch.
Then you can just change the gateway of whatever PC's to the IP of the
WISP router. But doing it that way would bypass any control your DC has
on the network. Of course, I just realized that is what you were looking
at doing anyway with the wireless cards.

Is the wireless Clearwire ?

Regards,

DanS

 

[DanS]

Was the *reason* why you were attempting this the same as mine?
Maybe I am going about trying to increase their Internet bandwidth
using the wrong methodology.

No, I read the thread. The reason was not to increase bandwidth, it was to
make a multi-homed PC work properly. Multi-homed is a PC with 2 NICs active
simultaneously on different subnets. Actually your DC is a multi-homed
server.


DanS

 

[allanc]

We are in Ontario, Canada and the WISP is Bell.
The reason for the additional wireless cards was (is) solely because I
wanted to add more bandwith and did not know how to do this via the
switch. If possible, I prefer to use whatever features are built into
Small Business Server to secure the network and provide monitoring. I
really do not understand (as of yet) everything you were suggesting and
I will have to re-read several times. I do appreciate the detailed
response.
Are you suggesting that I purchase a router and place it between the
WISP modem and the switch?

 

[DanS]

We are in Ontario, Canada and the WISP is Bell.
The reason for the additional wireless cards was (is) solely because I
wanted to add more bandwith and did not know how to do this via the
switch. If possible, I prefer to use whatever features are built into
Small Business Server to secure the network and provide monitoring. I
really do not understand (as of yet) everything you were suggesting
and I will have to re-read several times. I do appreciate the detailed
response.
Are you suggesting that I purchase a router and place it between the
WISP modem and the switch?

That would be the EASIEST way to connect it yes. The WAN port of the router
connected to the WISP modem, and the LAN side just uplinked into the
switch. As stated though, that would bypass the DC for whatever PC's are
using the WISP for internet.

DanS

 

[Guest]

I had a wired ethernet network (of only 2 pc's), but only had internet access
via dialup. Purchased a high speed Internet access via TV cable provider, but
the drop point where they installed the modem was physically too far from my
pc's to run a LAN cable (and I am too lazy to set up what would be needed for
that) so I purchased a wireless router and 2 USB antennas.

 

[allanc]

Which leads me to the next question.
How do I *not* bypass the DC?

 

[allanc]

thought it was going to.

Now, from what I gather from your description, the Domain Controller is
between the 'rest' of the network and the ISDN access device ?

ISDN ---> HUB ---> Server ---> 24 Port Switch

Then the hub has another PC on it, and the rest of the PC's are connected
to the switch. The server is configured to do some type of NAT ? The PC's
have the server IP as it's default gateway/DNS ? Is the DC doing
firewalling/access control and/or proxy server as well ?

That is the biggest issue. If the DC is providing those functions, then
it is more difficult to do the setup.

Yes, you can have more than one internet connection available on a
switch. You can have 4 DSL/Cable modems w/4 routers. You can uplink the
LAN side on each router into the same switch. As long as the LAN
interface on each of those 4 routers is on the same subnet, and not
identical, like 192.168.1.1, .2, .3, .4, any PC on that subnet hooked
into that switch can use any of those connections. All it would take is
to change the default gateway to the specific router/cable modem you
wanted to use.

With your situation it really depens on what you are/want to do with the
DC. Setting the DC aside, the WISP device's router's LAN port can be set
to the same subnet as the rest of the LAN, and uplinked into the switch.
Then you can just change the gateway of whatever PC's to the IP of the
WISP router. But doing it that way would bypass any control your DC has
on the network. Of course, I just realized that is what you were looking
at doing anyway with the wireless cards.

Is the wireless Clearwire ?

Regards,

DanS- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -

Do I require a special configuration on the wireless router?
In other words, if I was setting it up for a home network, I would
enable DHCP server. Would I disable this for our scenario?
Are there any others to be aware of?
Thank you in advance.

 

[DanS]

Do I require a special configuration on the wireless router?
In other words, if I was setting it up for a home network, I would
enable DHCP server. Would I disable this for our scenario?
Are there any others to be aware of?
Thank you in advance.

I assume you have DCHP running on the DC now ? If so then just disable
DHCP on the AP. I usually use all static in my setups. Get the wireless
up and running as it is out of the box...no encryption, etc. Then after
you are satisfied that it works, enable encryption, and authentication.
You can choke down acces by MAC address, allowing only your PC's MAC's
access. While this MAY have an affect on performance, depending on how
cheap a router you have, and everyone will say a MAC filter is easy to
get by, if there is (virtually) no performance hit, it will stop CASUAL
users...neighbors that run across an open AP.

DanS


DanS

 

[allanc]

Initially, all of the connections will be wired so I will disable the
wireless.
The owner wants to limit the usage of this connection to himself and
one other employee. Everyone else will remain at 64 Kbps ISDN.
The MAC address filtering (LinkSys WRT54G ~ $80) is for *only* wireless
connections, correct?
How can I ensure that other employees do not modify their 'default
gateway'?


I assume you have DCHP running on the DC now ? If so then just disable

 

[allanc]

So, for the PCs that will be using this WISP, I have to change the IP
to fixed (otherwise I cannot input the default gateway), correct?
Do I need to connect the output of the router to an uplink port on the
3Com switch (assuming that there is one)?

 

[DanS]

So, for the PCs that will be using this WISP, I have to change the IP
to fixed (otherwise I cannot input the default gateway), correct?
Do I need to connect the output of the router to an uplink port on the
3Com switch (assuming that there is one)?

I'll have to check on my DC for the details, but you can specify IP
addresses to hand out to certain computer according to the MAC address.
like 'marrying' the IP to a specific MAC. I'll need to check about the
default gateway being different for a specific MAC (I've never had to do
that before). Ultimatly though, you can change the default gateway very
easily from the cmd prompt, so even if the DC can not hand out a specific
gateway when it hands out IP's, you can run a simple .bat file when the
persons that are to use the WISP log on. The contents of the bat file
would be.....

route delete 0.0.0.0
route add 0.0.0.0 mask 0.0.0.0 192.168.x.x

The last IP is the new gateway of the router.

To connect the router, you don't need to hook to an 'uplink' port. The
WISP device will connect to the router's WAN port, and you can connect
any one of the other ports on the router to any one of the open ports on
the switch. There is nothing truly special about an uplink port other
than it is already crossed over, otherwise, connect it with a crossover
cable to any open port.

As for your other post, about the 'other' users not to use the WISP by
changing their gateway....you can set up the domain policies to not allow
anyone to change their network setting on a PC they are logged into.
Optionally, routers usually have a packet filter in them. I haven't used
a WRT54G, but the cheapy D-Link router I have here has packet filtering.
You can usually have an Access List. The Access List can be set to either
'Deny Access to IP's in the list' or 'Deny access to all IP's EXCEPT
what's in the list'. In this case, you would set it to 'Deny except
for...' and then add the IP's of the 2 PC's that are allowed to use it.
If the entire network is on DHCP, and the 2 IP's are 'married' to the
MAC's, they will get the same IP's all the time, and therefore, be the
only 2 PC's allowed to use the WISP connection.

Sounds simple enough.

Regards,

DanS

 

[allanc]

Will give it a try.
Thank you.

addresses to hand out to certain computer according to the MAC address.
like 'marrying' the IP to a specific MAC. I'll need to check about the
default gateway being different for a specific MAC (I've never had to do
that before). Ultimatly though, you can change the default gateway very
easily from the cmd prompt, so even if the DC can not hand out a specific
gateway when it hands out IP's, you can run a simple .bat file when the
persons that are to use the WISP log on. The contents of the bat file
would be.....

route delete 0.0.0.0
route add 0.0.0.0 mask 0.0.0.0 192.168.x.x

The last IP is the new gateway of the router.

To connect the router, you don't need to hook to an 'uplink' port. The
WISP device will connect to the router's WAN port, and you can connect
any one of the other ports on the router to any one of the open ports on
the switch. There is nothing truly special about an uplink port other
than it is already crossed over, otherwise, connect it with a crossover
cable to any open port.

As for your other post, about the 'other' users not to use the WISP by
changing their gateway....you can set up the domain policies to not allow
anyone to change their network setting on a PC they are logged into.
Optionally, routers usually have a packet filter in them. I haven't used
a WRT54G, but the cheapy D-Link router I have here has packet filtering.
You can usually have an Access List. The Access List can be set to either
'Deny Access to IP's in the list' or 'Deny access to all IP's EXCEPT
what's in the list'. In this case, you would set it to 'Deny except
for...' and then add the IP's of the 2 PC's that are allowed to use it.
If the entire network is on DHCP, and the 2 IP's are 'married' to the
MAC's, they will get the same IP's all the time, and therefore, be the
only 2 PC's allowed to use the WISP connection.

Sounds simple enough.

Regards,

DanS

 

[Rich Pierson]

I had a wired ethernet network (of only 2 pc's), but only had internet
access via dialup. Purchased a high speed Internet access via TV cable
provider, but the drop point where they installed the modem was
physically too far from my pc's to run a LAN cable (and I am too lazy
to set up what would be needed for that) so I purchased a wireless
router and 2 USB antennas.

I seem to remember that linksys makes a router/firewall on their higher end
line that will take up to 5 wan connections, each can be set as a gateway
so you could force traffic on some machines to use one gateway and others
to use another. RVN016 I think is the current model. I dislike using
servers as routers. Just a thought.

 

[allanc]

Their server is Small Business Server and the current subnet is
10.0.0.0.
Does not mean that none of the workstations will be able to communicate
with LinkSys router on 192.168?

 

[DanS]

Their server is Small Business Server and the current subnet is
10.0.0.0.
Does not mean that none of the workstations will be able to
communicate with LinkSys router on 192.168?

Technically, no, they will not be able to communicate with a device on a
different subnet.

The Linksys would need to be set on a 10. IP as well. 10.0.0.0 is a giant
subnet to use if that's not ckoked down smaller.

(Of course, I completely forgot the context of this thread. When you
post, you should add your replies UNDER what specific
questions/statements you are replying to. And <SNIP> parts that are not
relevant to the new questions/statements. Top-posting as you have done,
just makes it a lot harder to follow the discussion. Especially for
_those_ ex-hippies in here.)