ICS: Urgent Help Needed, Plzz.

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize,microsoft.public.tr.win9x-ntw,microsoft.public.windowsxp.network_web,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.windows,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.misc (More info?)

Hi buddies

Here is my scenario:

Server: Windows NT 4, P3 with 128 MB RAM
Clients: 8 to 20 PCs, Windows 98 or XP, mostly P3
Internet Connection: Individual dial-up accounts, 56k modem but

mostly connecting under 40kbps.

To enhance internet speed, we are considering to have a DSL connection,

with may be 2mbps bandwidth. connecting with a single pc. This pc will

have internet connection sharing so that others may benefit from the

high speed net connection.

1) Now, I know ICS can be enabled on XP, but we have NT server. So

how to enable ICS on NT 4?

2) Do we need to have an XP server specifically for ICS? Can it run

together with NT Server?

3) How to control/authenticate clients from XP server? I did enable ICS

on one XP sometime ago, but at that time there were only 2 pcs,

connected via cross connect cable.

4) When I enabled ICS sometime ago, the net speed was very slow on the

client even though it was very fast on XP server, via DSL modem. How to

ensure I will get good speed on 10-20 clients now??

5) Is 2mbps enough for 8-20 clients? How much should it be as minimum?

A detailed, point by point answer will be highly appreciated. Thank you.

Cheers.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize,microsoft.public.windowsxp.network_web,microsoft.public.tr.win9x-ntw (More info?)

Answers to yor questions:

1) NT4 does not come with ICS support. You have to install separate software
to do this (I would not recommend this - see point #2)

2) You can use Windows XP to create a 'ICS server' whereby you have two
network cards in the PC, one connected to the Internet and the other to your
local network. You then use ICS to allow Internet traffic to flow between the
two cards.

I would recommend you buy a router to do this (cost less than $100) and you
can even have built-in wireless. Basically your Internet connection goes into
one port of your router and then you hang PC's of the remaining ports. Most
routers only have 4-8 additional ports so you may need to buy a hub (provides
additional ports) to connect more machines.

3) You configure your clients to use DHCP which means that the router/ICS
will assing a I.P address and route the traffic out to the Internet.

4) ICS should not affect the speed. For purely browsing 2mb should be fine
for 20 clients.

5) See point #4. A 2Mb line will give you approx 250KB/s download. Most
service providers give you a much smaller upload speed (32KB/s typically) but
this doesn't matter as 95% of stuff you do on the Internet is downloading
.. The only activities that cause big uploading are: email, playing online
games, running some sort of server that people connect to from the internet.

Kind regards,

TimH

"First Man" wrote:

> Hi buddies
>
> Here is my scenario:
>
> Server: Windows NT 4, P3 with 128 MB RAM
> Clients: 8 to 20 PCs, Windows 98 or XP, mostly P3
> Internet Connection: Individual dial-up accounts, 56k modem but
>
> mostly connecting under 40kbps.
>
> To enhance internet speed, we are considering to have a DSL connection,
>
> with may be 2mbps bandwidth. connecting with a single pc. This pc will
>
> have internet connection sharing so that others may benefit from the
>
> high speed net connection.
>
> 1) Now, I know ICS can be enabled on XP, but we have NT server. So
>
> how to enable ICS on NT 4?
>
> 2) Do we need to have an XP server specifically for ICS? Can it run
>
> together with NT Server?
>
> 3) How to control/authenticate clients from XP server? I did enable ICS
>
> on one XP sometime ago, but at that time there were only 2 pcs,
>
> connected via cross connect cable.
>
> 4) When I enabled ICS sometime ago, the net speed was very slow on the
>
> client even though it was very fast on XP server, via DSL modem. How to
>
> ensure I will get good speed on 10-20 clients now??
>
> 5) Is 2mbps enough for 8-20 clients? How much should it be as minimum?
>
> A detailed, point by point answer will be highly appreciated. Thank you.
>
> Cheers.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize,microsoft.public.tr.win9x-ntw,microsoft.public.windowsxp.network_web,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.windows,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.misc (More info?)

Put a second NIC (network interface card) in the NT server and connect a
broadband router/ADSL modem. Use a product such as WinProxy or Wingate to
route the packets from the WAN (Internet side) to the LAN.

--
Jonah
"First Man" <amod97@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4ce5d9b2.0503180358.4c54d586@posting.google.com...
> Hi buddies
>
> Here is my scenario:
>
> Server: Windows NT 4, P3 with 128 MB RAM
> Clients: 8 to 20 PCs, Windows 98 or XP, mostly P3
> Internet Connection: Individual dial-up accounts, 56k modem but
>
> mostly connecting under 40kbps.
>
> To enhance internet speed, we are considering to have a DSL connection,
>
> with may be 2mbps bandwidth. connecting with a single pc. This pc will
>
> have internet connection sharing so that others may benefit from the
>
> high speed net connection.
>
> 1) Now, I know ICS can be enabled on XP, but we have NT server. So
>
> how to enable ICS on NT 4?
>
> 2) Do we need to have an XP server specifically for ICS? Can it run
>
> together with NT Server?
>
> 3) How to control/authenticate clients from XP server? I did enable ICS
>
> on one XP sometime ago, but at that time there were only 2 pcs,
>
> connected via cross connect cable.
>
> 4) When I enabled ICS sometime ago, the net speed was very slow on the
>
> client even though it was very fast on XP server, via DSL modem. How to
>
> ensure I will get good speed on 10-20 clients now??
>
> 5) Is 2mbps enough for 8-20 clients? How much should it be as minimum?
>
> A detailed, point by point answer will be highly appreciated. Thank you.
>
> Cheers.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize,microsoft.public.tr.win9x-ntw,microsoft.public.windowsxp.network_web,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.windows,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.misc (More info?)

Hi All

I very much appreciate all the input from the respondents. I
understand that the best solution is to put a router. The router
project is already in progress, but it will take some time as there
are many other similar places to be connected, and it will take its
pace.

In the meantime, we want to find an interim solution by using a DSL
shared connection. Now, to take the scenario further, here are the
issues:

1) I am planning to install some 3rd party software (preferably
freeware) on NT Server (which is connected to the rest of the LAN
through a 24 port hub).

2) I have explored many programs and have even tried FreeProxy.

3) How much will be the speed difference if I use NT server with
FreePRoxy as compared with a Cisco Router? Does processor power matter
in this case? How about RAM on server? As I understand the data will
be flowing from one network connection to the other so not much
processing power/memory should be required?

4) In FreeProxy, I have seen Usergroups, User Accounts, Password, etc.
But when I tried to browse through a client by putting Servername and
port (8080) in Internet Connection/LAN Settings, it did not prompt me
for any username/password. Isn't it weird? Am I doing something wrong.
I will certainly like to see who is accessing the net and preferably,
what activity is being done.

5) I also tried WinRoute, WithGate, WinProxy, etc but they did not run
well on XP.

The above issues are open for comments/suggestions.

Thanks once again.
Cheers.

James Egan <jegan@jegan.com> wrote in message news:<qg5o31p1n1bha36r0m72o9og39rdpg9kmi@4ax.com>...
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:41:30 -0500, daytripper
> <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> To enhance internet speed, we are considering to have a DSL connection,
> >> with may be 2mbps bandwidth. connecting with a single pc. This pc will
> >> have internet connection sharing so that others may benefit from the
> >> high speed net connection.
> >
> >Get it this time? Do you know what ICS actually does?
>
> What's the affinity with ICS? Particularly on an operating system that
> doesn't support it. With a adsl router he could dispense with all the
> hassle at very small cost. And get better ping times, throughput etc.
>
> >
> >And in his original post, he mentions supporting up to 20 LAN clients with
> >some internet access solution, hence the math on what he's actually need for a
> >router/switch solution. Yeah, fine he can use a 20-something port switch
> >uplinked to a single port router, but I doubt that's actually cheaper...
>
> If he already has 20 lan clients and a NT server then his network
> infrastructure is already in place so why the sudden need to get a 20
> port switch? He can easily plug the modem/router into his existing
> hub/switch. Not to mention that it will be infinitely more secure to
> separate the Internet connection from the LAN server.
>
> Jim.

 

[bar]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize,microsoft.public.windowsxp.network_web,microsoft.public.tr.win9x-ntw (More info?)

Be it a router or a PC connected to the Internet via ADSL or Cable, the
connection is sill 'shared' with all devices on the LAN.

The speed of data flow in the LAN and the avoidance of data collisions is
more important.

That is why most PCs connected to servers now go through an ethernet SWITCH
as opposed to a HUB. They perform similar functions, where a hub allows for
data to pass between any two devices attached [as may a router] and only two
devices at any one point in time. A switch differes in that data may flow
between any pairs of devices provided one of them is not busy exchanging data
with another. So a switch has the ability to accomodate simultaneous
connections, and a hub not. Inm your case 22 PCs are locked out each time
data moves between two others!

Now the swtch [and PC NICs] may have Gigabit capacity, which is many times
faster than the flow of data via a DSL connection.

A router is more or less a Modem with a Switch built in, and it also has the
intelligence to manage an internet connection: thus connects to the internet
and accomodates the flow of data between pairs of PCs. The DSL modem only
goes between the server and the internet. It is this 'single connection'
which causes speed differentials between the modem and a server then through
to other PCs and the Router sending data to a specific PC. If the server is
busy servicing activities between other PCs, it won't allow data to flow in
from the modem. Just think of the router as being an Octopus with many
tentacles each one attached to a PC. The DSL modem to Sever connection is by
comparison only a Snake. Speed differences are largely dependent upon the
speed of the NIC in each PC, not just the performance of a DSL modem
connected to a server.

As for RAM on a server: the more RAM the less data is moved in and out of a
Pagefile or Swapfile: so RAM and more of it boosts overall performance.

Microsoft decided to make IIS an optional component that is not installed by
default when you install the Windows Server 2003 operating system. The only
exception is the Web Server Edition of the OS, which by definition is
designed to be used only for web services and does not include many of the
components (such as the ability to be a domain controller) built into the
other three editions. So, depending upon the version you buy, Internet
'sharing' is always available, so why bother with WinGate or other: just
install IIS.










"First Man" wrote:

> Hi All
>
> I very much appreciate all the input from the respondents. I
> understand that the best solution is to put a router. The router
> project is already in progress, but it will take some time as there
> are many other similar places to be connected, and it will take its
> pace.
>
> In the meantime, we want to find an interim solution by using a DSL
> shared connection. Now, to take the scenario further, here are the
> issues:
>
> 1) I am planning to install some 3rd party software (preferably
> freeware) on NT Server (which is connected to the rest of the LAN
> through a 24 port hub).
>
> 2) I have explored many programs and have even tried FreeProxy.
>
> 3) How much will be the speed difference if I use NT server with
> FreePRoxy as compared with a Cisco Router? Does processor power matter
> in this case? How about RAM on server? As I understand the data will
> be flowing from one network connection to the other so not much
> processing power/memory should be required?
>
> 4) In FreeProxy, I have seen Usergroups, User Accounts, Password, etc.
> But when I tried to browse through a client by putting Servername and
> port (8080) in Internet Connection/LAN Settings, it did not prompt me
> for any username/password. Isn't it weird? Am I doing something wrong.
> I will certainly like to see who is accessing the net and preferably,
> what activity is being done.
>
> 5) I also tried WinRoute, WithGate, WinProxy, etc but they did not run
> well on XP.
>
> The above issues are open for comments/suggestions.
>
> Thanks once again.
> Cheers.
>
> James Egan <jegan@jegan.com> wrote in message news:<qg5o31p1n1bha36r0m72o9og39rdpg9kmi@4ax.com>...
> > On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:41:30 -0500, daytripper
> > <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > >> To enhance internet speed, we are considering to have a DSL connection,
> > >> with may be 2mbps bandwidth. connecting with a single pc. This pc will
> > >> have internet connection sharing so that others may benefit from the
> > >> high speed net connection.
> > >
> > >Get it this time? Do you know what ICS actually does?
> >
> > What's the affinity with ICS? Particularly on an operating system that
> > doesn't support it. With a adsl router he could dispense with all the
> > hassle at very small cost. And get better ping times, throughput etc.
> >
> > >
> > >And in his original post, he mentions supporting up to 20 LAN clients with
> > >some internet access solution, hence the math on what he's actually need for a
> > >router/switch solution. Yeah, fine he can use a 20-something port switch
> > >uplinked to a single port router, but I doubt that's actually cheaper...
> >
> > If he already has 20 lan clients and a NT server then his network
> > infrastructure is already in place so why the sudden need to get a 20
> > port switch? He can easily plug the modem/router into his existing
> > hub/switch. Not to mention that it will be infinitely more secure to
> > separate the Internet connection from the LAN server.
> >
> > Jim.
>

 

[Kurt]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize,microsoft.public.tr.win9x-ntw,microsoft.public.windowsxp.network_web,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.windows,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.misc (More info?)

I would just use a W2K or XP box as the internet gateway. Just connect one
NIC to the DSL and the other to the LAN. The NICs will need to be on
different subnets. Then share the Connection that connects to the DSL.
Window will inform you that is is changing your LAN IP address to
192.168.0.1. Let it do that. If yo can work on that network and want DHCP,
just leave it at 192.168.0.1. If you already have static IP addresses
assigned, change your LAN ip address to whatever you have configured as the
default gateway on your workstations. That's pretty much it.There's no
authentication issues since your gateway box is just acting as a router. You
can use it for workstations, servers, Linux boxes, whatever. You can even
set up port forwarding form the outside to servers on the LAN for VPNs, RDP,
Web server, etc..

....kurt


"First Man" <amod97@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4ce5d9b2.0503220405.8907b88@posting.google.com...
> Hi All
>
> I very much appreciate all the input from the respondents. I
> understand that the best solution is to put a router. The router
> project is already in progress, but it will take some time as there
> are many other similar places to be connected, and it will take its
> pace.
>
> In the meantime, we want to find an interim solution by using a DSL
> shared connection. Now, to take the scenario further, here are the
> issues:
>
> 1) I am planning to install some 3rd party software (preferably
> freeware) on NT Server (which is connected to the rest of the LAN
> through a 24 port hub).
>
> 2) I have explored many programs and have even tried FreeProxy.
>
> 3) How much will be the speed difference if I use NT server with
> FreePRoxy as compared with a Cisco Router? Does processor power matter
> in this case? How about RAM on server? As I understand the data will
> be flowing from one network connection to the other so not much
> processing power/memory should be required?
>
> 4) In FreeProxy, I have seen Usergroups, User Accounts, Password, etc.
> But when I tried to browse through a client by putting Servername and
> port (8080) in Internet Connection/LAN Settings, it did not prompt me
> for any username/password. Isn't it weird? Am I doing something wrong.
> I will certainly like to see who is accessing the net and preferably,
> what activity is being done.
>
> 5) I also tried WinRoute, WithGate, WinProxy, etc but they did not run
> well on XP.
>
> The above issues are open for comments/suggestions.
>
> Thanks once again.
> Cheers.
>
> James Egan <jegan@jegan.com> wrote in message
news:<qg5o31p1n1bha36r0m72o9og39rdpg9kmi@4ax.com>...
> > On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:41:30 -0500, daytripper
> > <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > >> To enhance internet speed, we are considering to have a DSL
connection,
> > >> with may be 2mbps bandwidth. connecting with a single pc. This pc
will
> > >> have internet connection sharing so that others may benefit from the
> > >> high speed net connection.
> > >
> > >Get it this time? Do you know what ICS actually does?
> >
> > What's the affinity with ICS? Particularly on an operating system that
> > doesn't support it. With a adsl router he could dispense with all the
> > hassle at very small cost. And get better ping times, throughput etc.
> >
> > >
> > >And in his original post, he mentions supporting up to 20 LAN clients
with
> > >some internet access solution, hence the math on what he's actually
need for a
> > >router/switch solution. Yeah, fine he can use a 20-something port
switch
> > >uplinked to a single port router, but I doubt that's actually
cheaper...
> >
> > If he already has 20 lan clients and a NT server then his network
> > infrastructure is already in place so why the sudden need to get a 20
> > port switch? He can easily plug the modem/router into his existing
> > hub/switch. Not to mention that it will be infinitely more secure to
> > separate the Internet connection from the LAN server.
> >
> > Jim.