Recommended Posts

network.jpg

Current:

1= Modem(No-IP)

2= switch(No-IP)

3= wireless router(Wasted IP, modem thinks its a computer but it doesnt take an IP)

4= switch(No-IP)

5= Laptop(1 IP)

6= Pocket PC(1 IP)

7= Desktop PC(1 IP)

8= Desktop PC(1 IP)

Not Listed= Desktop PC(NO IP - 1 IP NEEDED - Have to reset modem and kick off pocket pc to use this)

------------------------

6 needed, but only 5 avaliable

What i want:

1= Modem(No-IP)

2= switch(No-IP)

3= wireless router(1 IP)

4= switch(No-IP)

5= Laptop(Uses Router IP)

6= Pocket PC(Uses Router IP)

7= Desktop PC(1 IP)

8= Desktop PC(1 IP)

Not Listed= Desktop PC(1 IP)

------------------------------------

4/5 used

(I also have an extra computer that i have tor eset my modem and switch from my pocket pc to it every time i need to use one of them)

So i have 5 things that want to connect, and ihave 5 IPs. but one ip is wasted on the router. What i want to do is put the pocket pc and laptop under the router (1 IP) and the rest get their own (meaning i will have used 4 ip's)

Ok this is what i want to do, i want to be able to do windows file and printer sharing from the laptop to all three desktop pc's. I have opened required ports on the router, but it still doesnt work. Does anyone have any suggestions for what to do? (im using the WAN port, i have tried DMZ but it didnt work) :angry:

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/229649-router-problems/
Share on other sites

Do you have 5 publically addressable IPs (ie: given to you by the cable modem provider - or DSL, or whatever)?

If you are, do this:

Get a cheap linksys DSL/cable router - should be about $10-20, which will have a 4 port switch built in. Then connect the switches and wireless router to the linksys router. Now, run NAT on the router and give everything private IPs, eg:

edit: Didn't make this very clear. You don't set the private IP on the router, instead set it on the client devices.

Router = 192.168.0.1

Wireless access point = 192.168.0.2

Laptop = 192.168.0.3

Pocket PC = 192.168.0.4

Desktop PC #1 = 192.168.0.5

Desktop PC #2 = 192.168.0.6

Now, set the wireless access point to _client_ mode and give it a IP of what I put above.

Now for _everything_ give them a 'gateway' IP of the router - 192.168.0.1. Set static IPs to all of the devices (can use DHCP if you want, but you'll probably get conflicts).

NAT allows you to just use 1 IP for all the devices. Windows Printer and file sharing will work perfectly because you are using private and not public IPs.

Why did I suggest getting a cheapo linksys router instead of using the wireless router? A) it's got a switch built in, so he can have more expansion as time goes on, B) if you have a 'central' device it means you can troubleshoot faults much more easily without using bridiging etc (not needed, but probably will be if he uses this jumpble of topolgies that he is currently using and C) generally wireless routers tend to have cheapo routing parts that won't work very well, hell I don't even know if this router is a router or a switch.

However, if you are already using private IPs (which it doesn't sound like), then ignore me!

i want seperate ips for all my desktops! you can see that if you look at the part "what i want". If i wanted to put them all under 1 ip, my access point has a router and switch in it, anyways you dont need to go through all that trouble for setting up a router, they have dhcp servers

wow how much an exclamation point can do

Here is a new picture that might simplify things

newnet.jpg

(the green wire is going into WAN, not LAN)

I want the 3 desktops in the basement to get external IPs (24.118.xxx.xxx) I want the router to get an external IP (24.118.xxx.xxx) and my laptop and pocket pc will get an internal (192.168.100.x), but still be able to do file sharing with the ones in the basement.

Edited by mrp04

If you want all those seperate IP's, you will have to get a business account more than likely, and thusly pay out the nose for them. You can't just "magically" have them because you want them. Everybody would want multiple ones if that was possible. What was already suggested is what you "need" to do.

I do pay $10 extra a month for 4 extra IPs (5 total) :D i already have them :D, but i want to change the setup of my network cause my router "takes" one even when hooked into the lan port, meaning i dont have enough IPs (i have 5 devices, plus one wasted b router is 6, and i am only allowed 5)

I think you will find that it wont work, trying to have nat on the laptop and Pocket pc will stop standard file sharing working with the other IP range, even if you redirect the right ports it will only let you redirect to one machine.

The other problem with this is that unless your ISP is automatically blocking ports for you you will be opening your PC's to all on the net so you will need a firewall.

The other option if you need /want to run servers is to put a second nic in the PC's and put them on the router use dhcp and only enable file sharing on the internal nics.

  mrp04 said:
uh.. for the desktops or laptop and pocket pc?

for desktops cause i like stuff like remote desktop connection, and other stuff that require each computer to have its own IP

584723149[/snapback]

Ever heard of port forwarding?

You frankly are an idiot, I wrote you a pretty detailed explanation on exactly how to do it and you throw it back in my face with pretty pictures.

Listen to me very carefully: SMB IS NOT MEANT TO WORK OVER THE INTERNET. IT IS A NETWORKING PROTOCOL FOR LAN AND VPN.

Thank-you.

The people here at neowin are not friendly anymore. I said i want to have seperate IPs and asked how to set up SMB over the router, not how to configure my router to use one ip. But i guess thats possible, you coulda told me that instead of how to set up a router.

Plus you never said that SMB wont work over the WAN port, you just told me how to configure my router to use it with 1 ip.

It isnt a case of not being friendly, I think its more the case that you don't describe what you want to do (it might be in your head but we are not mind readers) very well, so a couple of helpfull people try and fill the gaps and help but you are not happy with there answers.

You were told that SMB wont work through nat so people tried to give options.

If you dont like the place - leave, if you and willing to accept the answers the dont ask.

I do not understand why you wanted to fork over $10 a month extra in the first place, so that you could RDP your machines from the public net? Was this the only reason? You wanted to put all your machines on public IP addresses - not behind any router for protection, so can RDP?

This can be done quite easy with port forwarding - I do believe port 3389 is the port for RDP, so if you had 5 machines you wanted to control from the outside, you would need to setup 5 forwards. Picks some ports you want to use (that are not in normal use by you), lets say 901 through 905, Forward 901 to your first machines 3389, 902 to your second machines 3389, etc..

Then when you want to connect to machine 1 from the outside, you would connect to your public IP on port 901 using the RDP client. If you wanted to control machine 5, then 905 - etc... Or how about just creating a VPN into your network, then you could do anything you wanted to any of the machines - file share, RDP, print, whatever - still only 1 public IP address needed. If you router does not support VPN, nor are you running an OS / software that would provide a VPN - you could also just create a SSH tunnel --> poor mans vpn ;)

Edit: When I say poor mans vpn, in NO way am I saying that SSH tunnels are less useful then vpn, or that vpn would be a better option, etc.. it would depend on what your exactly trying to accomplish. SSH tunnels might be a bit more to setup, for everything your trying to do - but there are plenty of FREE and LEGAL ways to get a SSH server up and running. This is the only reason I say poor man's - any linux distro already has it included, and on any other OS you can run openssh, etc.. FREE ssh clients available for every OS I can think of, etc... VPN you have to have a router(s) that support it, or being running a OS or software - (ain't always FREE).

Edited by BudMan
  mrp04 said:
The people here at neowin are not friendly anymore. I said i want to have seperate IPs and asked how to set up SMB over the router, not how to configure my router to use one ip. But i guess thats possible, you coulda told me that instead of how to set up a router.

Plus you never said that SMB wont work over the WAN port, you just told me how to configure my router to use it with 1 ip.

584723696[/snapback]

Ok... They werent unfriendly you didnt provide all the information. #2 The scope of what you want to do is above your knowledge. So... Dont get ****ed at someone for NOT calling you a moron and getting fustrated that they cant seem to get you to understand that its not possible to do what you want. I'm not flaming, just trying to get a few things clear. Hopefully some other readers have learned a few things.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I almost picked one up...Best Buy has a heck of a time getting them, much less keep them in stock.
    • Microsoft bans LibreOffice developer's account without warning, rejects appeal by David Uzondu Recently, we reported on LibreOffice, accusing Microsoft of intentionally using complex file formats as a tactic to lock in users to Microsoft Office, hindering open source alternatives like LibreOffice. Now, Microsoft has banned LibreOffice developer, Mike Kaganski, from using its services, citing an "activity that violates [its] Services Agreement". According to Mike, this happened last Monday when he tried to send a technical email to the LibreOffice dev mailing list, which is a normal part of his routine, but Thunderbird returned an error saying the message couldn't be sent. His account was blocked upon retry, and he found himself completely logged out of his Microsoft account. Kaganski guessed that his mail and account were getting flagged by a bot or something, since he was quite sure that nothing in the mail violated Microsoft's terms of service. So he decided to file an appeal, a process which later made him call Redmond "miserably incompetent in IT." The automated system asked for his phone number, which he provided, only to be greeted by a "Try another method" error message. The problem was that there was no other method offered. He then decided to reach out to Microsoft support directly. After some digging, he found a link to contact the team, and there it was, a button asking him to "Sign in to Contact support". Now, you might go, "Hold up, how is he supposed to sign in to contact support when his problem is that he can't sign in in the first place?" As Kaganski himself put it: He eventually got to use his wife's account to file an appeal and finally received a message from support. The instructions inside asked him to go to the sign-in page and, when told the account is blocked, provide a phone number (something he had already tried). Microsoft ignored his detailed report of the failing process, marked his ticket as resolved without any real action, and simply closed it. He is yet to recover his account. As for the email he was trying to send, he was later able to use Gmail, and it went through with no problem. If you are interested, you can read the full email for yourself and see if it violates Microsoft's services agreement. Mike's not the only person who's had their account locked recently, with seemingly no way to recover it. On the 17th of last month, Reddit user u/deus03690 shared how Microsoft locked their account, which, among other things, contained 30 years of "irreplaceable photos and work" on OneDrive. Their appeal, like Mike's, has been fruitless so far. The user said Microsoft reached out 10 days later, asking them to fill out a recovery form and promising to help them "every step of the way," but they haven't heard from the company since.
    • It's like Microsoft hasn't learned anything from Internet Explorer fiascos. Or they weren't slapped hard enough financially for it...
    • Yes they're payroll taxes with some of it linked to share-based compensation for employees. So when the stock price was rising in q2 these charges also increased.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Apprentice
      MikeK13 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Week One Done
      andeyhawk65 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      Jake2530 earned a badge
      First Post
    • Explorer
      Deranox went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Week One Done
      John Volks earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      687
    2. 2
      ATLien_0
      259
    3. 3
      Xenon
      178
    4. 4
      neufuse
      135
    5. 5
      +FloatingFatMan
      100
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!