Windows Forum

Ask something
Question Locked

Unusual network setup

0 helpful
5 replies

by cptcrckpot

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

I have an unusual set up, which I'm having a small problem with. First I'll explain what I have and why, then I'll explain the problem.

I have 2 main computers, as well as a few other computers belonging to other family members.

PC1 is running Vista Ultimate, and is connected to a low speed, low latency DSL connection (I live in a rural area, so my internet options are limited). I primarily use this PC for online gaming, hence the need for a low latency connection. However, because it's low speed/bandwidth, it is unsuitable for doing any web surfing or downloading.

PC2 is running XP Media Center 2005. It is connected to the internet via satellite. It provides decent enough bandwidth, but very high latency. I use it to surf the web and to download. Also, the other PCs in the house connect to it and use its shared internet connection.

PC1 currently has 2 NICs, while PC2 has 3 NICs.

PC1 NIC1 is connected to the DSL modem. NIC2 is connected to a network switch.

PC2 NIC1 is connected to the satellite modem. NIC2 is connected to a wireless hub, which other PCs in the house connect to, and it provides the shared connection. NIC3 is connected to the same switch as PC 1.

The problem I have is with the connection between PC1 and PC2. I gave them their own separate connection because I don't want either PC using any part of the other PC's internet connection, but I wanted to be able to transfer files between them in addition to using Multiplicity to allow me to control both computers with one keyboard/mouse. They are both set up with static IPs (10.168.2.xx, though I've used a multitude of different IPs while trying to correct my problem). Neither of them has a default gateway set up, and the prefered DNS is set to be each PCs own IP for that connection, with the alternate being the other PC's IP. Both PCs connect and see each other fine. However, on PC1 (the Vista machine), the connection is labeled as "Unidentified Network", it won't let me rename it, and it defaults to being a public network. Is there any way to correct this? Is there some better way that I could set up my network while still keeping internet availability isolated between the two machines?

5 replies

by Former member

Are the other computers under? (IE: my network or Workgroup), then go into "setup internet connections" and try the other names that the other computers are under.
Or try these:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=80111f21-d48d-426e-96c2-08aa2bd23a49&displaylang=en

http://www.uvnc.com/

http://www.filetransit.com/files.php?name=Remote_Connection

Please post back if you have more problems or questions.

by cptcrckpot

All of the computers use the workgroup name of FEDERATION, and they can all see each other without any problem.

None of the links you provided are applicable to my situation. Both of my primary PCs have their own monitors, and by using Stardock Multiplicity I can use one keyboard/monitor to control both, I just move my mouse from the edge of one screen and moves over to the other PC. I just want Vista to properly recognize the network connection between the two PCs, instead of declaring it an "Unidentified Network".

by cg it

there are routers that are made to do this. Their even affordable.

Their are affordable routers that also provide VLAN capabilities which can do what you want to do.

But as you said, unusual setup using computers as routers.

Vista's network software doesn't work like XP. With XP you can use a hosts file and alternate paths but Vista's Network and Sharing program is funky imo. If you have Network Discovery turned on, it will only detect the subnet it's on. everything else, file and media sharing is all subnet based. So if you want to access resources or media on another subnet, you really need a real router with a routing table you can configure.

Microsoft made Vista more ICS more secure, but with that made it harder to work with. Especially for those consumers who try to make their home computing complex. Microsoft doesn't think the average joe consumer is going to make a 2 or 3 computer home network a multi-subnet network.

by cptcrckpot

Unfortunately, using a router isn't an option for sharing the Satellite connection, because of the PC based packet accelerator/caching software that it requires. A router might be a possibility for the connection between the Vista and XP machines, but seems a little excessive just for setting up an isolated connection between 2 machines, especially since the connection works using just a cheap $10 network switch.

I agree that Microsoft made Vista networking a lot less flexible while making it more secure. Sadly, they don't seem to have any desire to make any changes to it, since "Unidentified Network" problems have been present in Vista since the early beta days.

This discussion is closed to new replies.