[patpai]

Good morning everyone

Litle question this morning for you super experts out there.

At home I've got 2 separate networks that are used by different peeps from the houshold for various reasons. They work fine.

Here is quick setup:

1st network:
Cable modem connected to router connected to 2 other computers. Used for Bittorent, internet.

2n network:
DSL modem connected to router connected to 2 other comps. Used for gaming and the internet.

I reside in the second network and I would like to be able to SEE network 1 from my DESktop.

My comp setup:
-network card as 2 inputs, 1 is used right now to connect to router. The other is free.
-I use win XP home edition

And I don't know a lot about networks, just the basics.

Can I get my computer located inside 2nd network to see the 1st network, or at least 1 machine inside that network?

Thx for any hlp guys, its appreciated.

[chuckhole]

Just back from a wonderful week of vacation... no computers.

So... to answer your question... Yes you can.

Please supply some basic information from a computer on each network:
IP Address
Subnet Mask
Gateway Address

The way that a router works is this:
When your computer tries to contact another computer within the same network, the request is sent directly inside your network. When you attempt to contact a computer outside of your network, the router handles the request. It knows that the request needs to be passed on to your ISP. In your case, you want the router to pass the request on to the other router if it is in the other household network, otherwise pass the request on to the Internet.

There are two issues that you must overcome:

1) Either the two routers must be made aware of each other with routing tables or the PC's must have their own route tables added for the other household network.

2) To perform name resolution (DNS) for the other household network, you must have your own DNS (or WINS) server running in your household networks or you must use a HOST file on each PC that will perform the name resolution on each network. If you use host files, then each PC must be assigned a static IP address so that they will not change.

[patpai]

Ok thank you so very much for your reply, let me get the info out to you soon.
Im at work right now, so I can't get to it... hehe

[Scleros]

There are two issues that you must overcome...

If the OP simply connected the 1st network to the unused nic port and assigned addressing, wouldn't a route get added to the local route table for that network and any traffic for that network automatically get sent out the correct nic port? That single computer would be a member of both networks. In fact, I think you can even bridge the two subnets if desired if using Windows XP (not positive if Home version supports this).

How are you going to connect the 1st network's router to the 2nd network's router since most home routers don't have multiple interfaces?

[chuckhole]

As long as the routers are connected to the same physical network infrastructure, then if the router supports a configurable network address translation table, that would do the trick. Name resolution would still have to be performed on the local network. The easiest way for this to be done without having more expensive gear would be to use host files, static addressing and individaul route tables on each computer. Once the setup is determined, it can be duplicated to each computer.

[Scleros]

As long as the routers are connected to the same physical network...

That's the part I'm not envisioning. I'm betting each router has a builtin 4 port switch and the computers are connected to each switch. How are the two routers going to connect?

[chuckhole]

That's the part I'm not envisioning. I'm betting each router has a builtin 4 port switch and the computers are connected to each switch. How are the two routers going to connect?

If they are single LAN port routers, connect them both to the same switch. If they have multiport switches built in, then connect the two switches together. In a small network, I would also assume the same type of configuration you mentioned. And with that being said, these routers probably would not support NAT and multiple addresses on the same port.

[KISS]

Related issue:

I've got a network whose gateway is 10.10.0.1 and all of the networked stuff is on that network. The LAN port of that router is connected to a DSL modem (Westel) in bridge mode.

I know, for a fact, if I disconnect the Westell to WAN(router) port and use a crossover cable with the proper network configuration to access 192.168.1.1, the DSL modem, I can access it's configuration page.

I haven't tested, connecting a hub to the DSL modem and having a stand-alone internet radio playing if I can access the DSL modem's configuration page, nor have I placed the WAN and LAN ports of the router on the same physical segment using a hub/switch. I think I did try making the DSL's modem address to reside on the network with no success.

The RFC for Bridge protocol doesn't seem to offer any useful info either.

I suppose I can add a permanent routing entry into Window's routing tables to make it work. This would become more useful with DynDNS, but for now, I'd like to be able to access the status pages.

Any thoughts?

[KISS]

Patpai:

I might have a solution for you. Suppose everyone is connected to the same switch. The DSL modem and the Cable modem both set to bridge mode with different gateway addresses. Each router would also provide it's own set of DHCP and NAT.

If there is wireless connections, then have one for each router.

The switch will compartmentalize traffic.

Configuration would basically be easy with just the gateway address changing for the connection. If you wanted to use the other network wirelessly, then connect to that particular access point.

Not sure if you can restrict wired connections by MAC address, but if you could that would be a security method. With wireless you can restrict in that fashion and by password.

[chuckhole]

As a test to all above:
I just connected one of our SAN switches to the same physical network as the LAN. The LAN is on 172.16.x.x and the SAN is on 10.x.x.x. I then changed my NIC on my laptop docking station to a physical address in the LAN. I then added a second IP address to the same NIC with a 10.x.x.x address.

Note: Our routers are not configured for and are not aware of ANY 10.x.x.x network. All of the ports on the SAN switch are on the same VLAN and all of the ports on the LAN switch are on the same VLAN so you will know that we are also not performing VLAN routing.

I am now able to open the web based SAN configuration. I can open the iSCSI Intiator on my laptop and connect to a volume on the SAN through the 10.x.x.x. network (good place for the MP3's... bwaahhahaha). And my Internet connection via our ISA Firewall is still running and I can still ping another server in the WAN.

If I want to perform any type of routing through the 10.x.x.x network, a Static Route will have to be added on my PC. I also added an entry to my HOSTS file so that I could open the SAN configuration by name.

[Scleros]

If they have multiport switches built in, then connect the two switches together...

So this would be a dual router-on-a-stick setup with the two networks superimposed on both switches...

Only comment: nontraditional networking arrangements tend to expose firmware weaknesses and lead to behavioral funkiness in consumer grade gear.

[chuckhole]

So this would be a dual router-on-a-stick setup with the two networks superimposed on both switches...

Only comment: nontraditional networking arrangements tend to expose firmware weaknesses and lead to behavioral funkiness in consumer grade gear.

So true. Our switches are much more costly than "consumer grade". There is a big difference between $49.95 and $2,000+. I say plus because some of them have multiple fiber modules and that can get really expensive.

However, in a home environment, you are not going to expose hundreds of computers to the same risks. So, performing a little out of the box work is not out of the question for some people.

[patpai]

Patpai:

I might have a solution for you. Suppose everyone is connected to the same switch. The DSL modem and the Cable modem both set to bridge mode with different gateway addresses. Each router would also provide it's own set of DHCP and NAT.

If there is wireless connections, then have one for each router.

The switch will compartmentalize traffic.

Configuration would basically be easy with just the gateway address changing for the connection. If you wanted to use the other network wirelessly, then connect to that particular access point.

Not sure if you can restrict wired connections by MAC address, but if you could that would be a security method. With wireless you can restrict in that fashion and by password.

Thanks for that, like I said, I'm not network savy at all, I know my way around computers, but this stuff sounds chinesse right now.

How do I get my hands on a SWITCH?? Is that like a router? I don't mind buying one as loong as its not like 200$ for it or something... lol

PS sorry for late reply, been awfly busy and reading all the replies now, I think I'm getting lost a lot more hehe

PS2
I do know that both my routers right now have wirelless capabilities, does this add complessity to my problem or I can just set my network up regularly and once it works, focus of the wireless stuff..
Basically what I'm asking is that once I get my network going using your aproach for example, am I guna have difficulty using the wireless function or if it will just work well as before.

PS3
Keep in mind right now, that I've only been doing plug-n-play setups. What I mean is that I didn't configure anything except for paswwords and some very minute things. I didn't mess with mac addresses etc.. Duno how :(

[chuckhole]

What is a switch? It is a way of connecting one to many devices. Some of your routers have small 4-port switches built into them.

There are two basic types of switches: managed and unmanaged. The unmanaged switches range from the simple to... well, simple. They are inexpensive and can be found for less than $6-8 per port. The managed switches ranged from the relatively simple to the very complex. With these types of switches you can configure each port such as activate/deactivate, select the speed, frame size, connection speed, STP metric, VLAN membership, etc.

The main difference between a switch and a hub is that even the simple switches are intelligent devices. Think of it like a postman delivering the mail. Can you imagine having to deliver mail to a house on a street with many houses? The postman will have to stop at each door, knock, wait for an answer and then ask the homeowner what their name and address is, check the letter and see if it is for them. If not, go to the next house and do the same until the postman finds the right homeowner. This is how a hub works. Whereas a switch keeps a list of the addresses that are connected to it. In this case, the postman goes from street to street same as a hub but once the right street is found, he then drives down the street to the correct address and then delivers the mail. Now if a switch is connected to another switch and so on, the more ports you have on the network, the more efficient it becomes. Could you imagine having to stop at hundreds of houses just to find the right one? All that talking and questions you have to ask?

This is why switches are more efficient than hubs and given the cost difference, hubs are not sold much any more.

A managed switch gives you much more control over each port. You can isolate ports from each other with the use of VLANS. Virtual LANS are defined as logical network segments. Similar to a router which routes from one network to another. VLANS isolate the network into segments to streamline the traffic. Also, managed switches have logs in them that will log errors and events. You can also look at the port statistics to see if a specific port has a problem. As you can imagine, these type of switches, depending on size, number of ports, type of ports, etc. they can get very expensive - anywhere from $20-$500 per port.

[patpai]

Ok thank you very much for that explanation.
So lets say I get a switch qround 80$ at BestBuy and bring it home.

I basically have the switch and my 2 above separate networks. Connection wize, do I connect 1 port behind the switch to an empty port behind router in NT1 and then I connect router in NT2 to the back of my switch?

Once I do that, is my network wired correctly for me to start configuring the switch to see both networks.

As I mentioned aboved, I want a computer from Nt2 to see a computer in Nt1, if I get that, I'll be very happy...

Thanks...

[urtech1]

OK, what you would have to do is... run a physical wire (striaght through) rj45 cable from the free nic card on your computer to the network 1 router, than your connection would be active, change the ip address, subnet, gateway, primary dns for that connection to match the settings on the router, afterwards make sure you are in the same workgroup, if all is well than your connection should be good and you will see all computers on your network 2 and network 1, and you should have interent connection from both directions,

GOOD LUCK ,
YURIY

[patpai]

Ok, I will give that a try and let you know if I make it :)