LAN Connection & Wireless in Windows XP

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windows.networking.wireless (More info?)

All,

I have a laptop that has a wireless card and also an Ethernet connection.
When I plug directly into my wireless router via the Ethernet cable, my
wireless connection will still pass data through. I disable my wireless
connection to force traffic over the Ethernet, but I am not sure that is
what I am supposed to do.

I would think that windows would look at the link speed of the two
connections and send all traffic over the better one, but my system clearly
proves that is not what happens. Does anyone know of a setting in windows
where you prioritize your connections?

Thanks in advance

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windows.networking.wireless (More info?)

Try putting a bridge between the two connections. Go to Network Connections,
highlight both Lan and wireless connections, right click and select bridge
connections.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windows.networking.wireless (More info?)

Hi,

I would recommend reordering the list of connections you have for
networking, by this I mean, going into

Control Panel | Network Connections

Click on the “Advanced� menu item

Click “Advanced Settings�

On the “Adapters and Bindings� tab look at the list of connections you have,
if you require you LAN to have priority over you WLAN, then move the LAN
connection to the top and WLAN below using the Green arrows on the right hand
side.

This might help, cant guarantee it but it’s another option to try if the
first suggestion didn’t work.

Kind regards,

Stuart.

"scadav" wrote:

> All,
>
> I have a laptop that has a wireless card and also an Ethernet connection.
> When I plug directly into my wireless router via the Ethernet cable, my
> wireless connection will still pass data through. I disable my wireless
> connection to force traffic over the Ethernet, but I am not sure that is
> what I am supposed to do.
>
> I would think that windows would look at the link speed of the two
> connections and send all traffic over the better one, but my system clearly
> proves that is not what happens. Does anyone know of a setting in windows
> where you prioritize your connections?
>
> Thanks in advance
>

 

[jlmiller5]

Does anybody know a way that I can make a particular program, such as IE or Chrome, use a particular connection, and other software use another type of connection? i would like to surf the net over the wireless and use the wired ethernet to run Outlook and connect with servers.

 

[eibgrad]

Windows will not allow you to pick and choose network connections on a per application basis. All you can do when using multiple network adapters is prioritize them (see Network Connections->Advanced->Advanced Settings->Connections). Whichever one is listed first will be used EXCLUSIVELY since any resource (the Internet, other computers, dvr, etc.) is equally accessible via either network connection. In effect, the other network connection goes unused.

The only way Windows will use different network connections is if they are actually DIFFERENT networks (subnets). IOW, if Windows can only reach a particular resource on one of several available network connections, then obviously it will use the relevant network connection.

With that in mind, there’s not much you can do assuming all your network connections share the same network. To the extent you could place specific devices on a different network you could make some progress. But that’s problematic for most ppl.

The easiest solution I’ve found is to use a VM (virtual machine) such as Virtual Box. Make sure the network connection you want to use for the host is listed first in Network Connections->Advanced->Advanced Settings->Connections. Then create your guest VM but specify the other network adapter for virtualization. Now you can control network usage INDIRECTLY by confining certain applications to one or the other environment.

It works because for all intents and purposes you’re using two different Windows systems, each w/ its own network adapter. Obviously you could do the same thing w/ two PHYSICAL machines, but using a VM is more practical. And it doesn’t have to be Windows (esp. since it raises the issue of licensing), maybe use Linux. I find this solution works best when you only need one connection for small amounts of time and/or limited purposes. For example, accessing work files across a VPN. Rather than be bound to that VPN all day, even for private/personal activities, you keep your private life on the host, your work life on the guest VM.

Not a perfect solution, but works reasonably well in certain circumstances. And with VirtualBox’s seamless mode, you can do a pretty good job of integrating the host and guest VM environments into one seamless experience. So much so you may that at times you may accidentally attempt to access a resource on the wrong system!

 

[jlmiller5]

Wow, thanks for the reply. I will try that out.