Steve Winograd said:
"Interrogative" said:
Steve Winograd said:
You don't have to change anything in your laptop's setup between home
and office. Windows networking supports multiple workgroups, and a
computer in any workgroup can access a computer in any workgroup.
That's a little misleading. You cant have a computer on 192.168.0.2 and
255.255.255.0 access 169.254.140.1 on subnet mask 255.255.0.0 unless both
are on the same machine without a bridge and then WITH the bridge, you
have
to have auto assigned IP for that to work anyway. In case I am being
unclear, the machine acting as a bridge (or with both networks attached
even
if not a bridge) can see both networks. Without a bridge, a client on
either
network cannot see a client on the other network. [remainder snipped]
That's an interesting situation, Interrogative. Let me change my
statement to take it into account:
Windows networking supports multiple workgroups, and workgroup
membership has no effect on whether computers can access each other.
I would have added, above, "where both networks are attached to the one
machine" to indicate that this machine is being part of both networks as
this machine I am typing from is. It sees both networks but the client
machines on either network that dont have a direct connection to any other
network dont see each other.
If two computers can access each other when they're in the same
workgroup, they can access each other when they're in different
workgroups, too.
Well, not quite. There are a lot of variables not taken into account. Let me
try and put this simply (and yes, I agree that I probably wont succeed
):
If computer A on one network and subnet (eg 192.168.0.1 and 255.255.255.0)
wants to talk to another in the same premises without phoning into it and
that other machine, computer B is on 169.254.140.1 with subnet 255.255.0.0
you need to have a bridge in between the two machines or they will NOT see
each other. Alternatively, if you use a separate NIC for each network on
either computer A or B and then directly connect it to the other machine,
then one machine has credentials for both networks now, can be bridged or if
not needed can be left without a bridge and still see both networks. If you
dont do it that way, you need a physical connection to the other network and
have to set up the different network credentials. Yep, I was right. I didnt
do it simply.
Hmmmmm... I think it would be easily understood with a graphic
representation of what I said where you see one computer, 2 nics, 1 line
going to one network and 1 line going to the other network, clients in each
network that talk to each other but no lines between each network without
going through that computer with 2 NICs. That would show that the two
networks are incapable of talking to each other directly without a bridge
BUT the machine with 2 nics actually IS capable of doing it. With wireless
networking NICs being so cheap these days in the lower speed range, if speed
isn't an issue, it would be simpler and possibly could be cheaper if not too
many machines to have a wi-fi nic in each machine in both networks, set up
to contact both networks.
My head is spinning!