Networking with Cable modem and a hub

unclemojo · #1 (**permalink**) 30th June, 2002, 08:00 PM

I'll give you a rundown of whats going on:

I can network the 2 pc's just fine using the hub, under windows and even seeing some files under linux/windows network.

If I hook them up to the internet with the hub, only one of the PC's will have access to the net, and then they can no longer see eachother. Each box can see itself in the workgroup, but not the other, and one box will not access the net as well.

I've changed the IP addresses by 1 for the secoind system, let it auto configure, set it up myself with the variety of ways available through XP, and may try netbui (if Linux can be linked by it)

I'm about to start pulling my fingernails out! My hair's already gone, so they're all thats left.

Any idea why this would happen? I'm using a surfboard cable modem, Linksys 5 port Workgroup hub, and everything works just dandy till I plug in the uplink for the internet. Then it frags the networks, and I have to rebuild it in some cases. I've contacted my cable company if networking under 1 IP is possible and they reassured me that it is.

Man, I networked 98 machines over 56K dialup easier than this...I'm stuck....

cloasters · #2 (**permalink**) 30th June, 2002, 11:12 PM

The cable ISP assumes that you'll use a router for your LAN. A hub ain't "smart" enough to assign "on the fly" IP's. Your choice is to buy a router, or rent an extra Static IP from the cable company. A LAN router is cheaper in the long run.

unclemojo · #3 (**permalink**) 1st July, 2002, 06:25 AM

Yeah, thats what I figured

The static IP is $10 per month and the router I can get rather cheap, so I support that will be the route for me to go. Thanks Cloasters for confirming my horrid thoughts of having to buy more stuff !

(I know it won't be a Cisco router...I used to work for them and lets just say I can say it all in one word..... crap ...... Lots of defective items and TONS of repairs and crashes. Know of a good brand or cheap one I can pick up (for 5PC's on a network, nothing major) Thanks again!

Samuknow · #4 (**permalink**) 1st July, 2002, 06:47 AM

I am using a router to connect 3 pc to cable in my house. It works great. Just picked up a cheapie at Best Buy...Yikes 2 times today I have mentioned BB. Note...This is NOT a paid advertisement.

Fast, reliable and always works.

unclemojo · #5 (**permalink**) 1st July, 2002, 07:49 AM

Hey Sam, what brand did you get? I may be stoppin by the local BB after work to get one! hmmm...lets check the BB site

Samuknow · #6 (**permalink**) 1st July, 2002, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by unclemojo
Hey Sam, what brand did you get? I may be stoppin by the local BB after work to get one! hmmm...lets check the BB site

 

We make hubs and switches at work here. I have quite a few. Some are quite spendy. Right now I am using a Dlink router for cable and networking. 50 bucks and handles everthing..

unclemojo · #7 (**permalink**) 1st July, 2002, 08:19 AM

Works for me...least I'll be able to get the darn network up and running... Thanks for the info!

cloasters · #8 (**permalink**) 1st July, 2002, 07:49 PM

D-Link sounds good to me, too. I bought a Linksys hub that works fine, but... the LED's don't indicate which ports are in use correctly. It's really a cosmetic defect, but... see how fast I buy another Linksys anything!

I thought that reg'lar type folks can't afford Cisco gear. I have a 678 DSL Modem/Router, but a "real" Cisco router?

Jazz · #9 (**permalink**) 1st July, 2002, 07:59 PM

Personally i am a netgear man. I have messed with cisco, linksys, dlink, netopia and a long list of others and i think that the netgear line is so far the best. i have a out of production rt314 but you can still find some of them around the net. And another helpfull site for routers www.netgear.org

unclemojo · #10 (**permalink**) 1st July, 2002, 09:00 PM

Yeah, I like netgear also...My only issue is I'm pressed for fundage...work boned me out of a raise, so I'm having to look elsewhere...(god I hate that) anyway, thanks for the info. The RT314 sounds like a winner...jsut what I need
2 linux / 2 weindows

Áedán · #11 (**permalink**) 2nd July, 2002, 08:21 AM

Some ISPs allow a second address for free. Some ISPs charge for each extra address. Talk to your ISP and see what they say.

AidanII

Samuknow · #12 (**permalink**) 2nd July, 2002, 08:24 AM

MINE WANTED TO HIT ME FOR AN EXTRA 15 A MONTH. ALREADY HITTING ME UP FOR 40 FOR A 1.2 MEG CONNECTION. A ROUTER WAS CHEAPER AND BETTER IN THE LONG RUN. PLUG AND PLAY FOR ADDING MACHING WITH DHCP ENABLED...

unclemojo · #13 (**permalink**) 2nd July, 2002, 08:37 AM

yeah, Adelphia wanted an extra $10 / month for the 2nd IP from me. I get unreal DL speeds (3.0mb dl and 1.5mb ul) so the router will save me money in the long run anyway. Can't complain about broadband, thats for sure...just wish I could network the darn things!!

loop · #14 (**permalink**) 14th July, 2002, 07:42 AM

you can use an internet sharing application to share the internet
have one machine connect to the cable modem as normal, then run windows Internet connection sharing. Have the other machines connect to your network and use dhcp. Its how I have it at my house.

Samuknow · #15 (**permalink**) 14th July, 2002, 07:54 AM

I did this for a while. It is the cheap and dirty method. Not very dependaple or reliable. MS still has some work to do here.

 

A router is faster and more stable.

robbie · #16 (**permalink**) 14th July, 2002, 11:52 AM

I got a linksys router several months ago. I got the open box special (I usually do) and paid $88. I think they were around $100.

I just saw an ad for them at BB for $69.

I hate the fact that prices drop like that!! Pretty much the MAIN reason I won't go out and get a GF4 TI 4600 for $300
Rob

loop · #17 (**permalink**) 15th July, 2002, 01:06 PM

Don't use MS anymore, have a Mandrake 8 internet server. Very reliable, has a few bugs when it comes to instant messenging (no file transfer etc...). But everything else seems fine, and quite fast.

unclemojo · #18 (**permalink**) 15th July, 2002, 06:35 PM

Setting up the network isn't a problem...just unplug the uplink from the cable modem and viola! MS has serious networking issues under XP, and they've admitted to it (oddly enough) I dropped the second XP box for a Red Hat 7.3 box, but I haven't found a way to run Mac OS in a shell in Red Hat, so I may have to revert back to Mandrake 8.2 for that. It's not a very important feature to most, but The more I see coming from Micro$haft in the future with their XP replacement NOT being backwards compatible, the sourer the taste becomes.

I'm no linux guru, thats for certain, but I'll be darned if I'm going to rely on the $haft $quad for my personal computing in the future. Heck, I'd rather pay the $99 for Lindows than be trapped under an overfluffed dawg from the $hafters. A bit of a rant on Bill and Co. but in my opinion a well deserved one. I had better luck sharing networking 5 boxes on Windows 98 and sharing a 56K dial up connection. With each new release, it does get better (looking) but seems to fall apart after time. Looks like Loop has the right idea (way to go

) Boycott Micro$haft!!

loop · #19 (**permalink**) 16th July, 2002, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by unclemojo
Setting up the network isn't a problem...just unplug the uplink from the cable modem and viola! MS has serious networking issues under XP, and they've admitted to it (oddly enough) I dropped the second XP box for a Red Hat 7.3 box, but I haven't found a way to run Mac OS in a shell in Red Hat, so I may have to revert back to Mandrake 8.2 for that. It's not a very important feature to most, but The more I see coming from Micro$haft in the future with their XP replacement NOT being backwards compatible, the sourer the taste becomes.

I'm no linux guru, thats for certain, but I'll be darned if I'm going to rely on the $haft $quad for my personal computing in the future. Heck, I'd rather pay the $99 for Lindows than be trapped under an overfluffed dawg from the $hafters. A bit of a rant on Bill and Co. but in my opinion a well deserved one. I had better luck sharing networking 5 boxes on Windows 98 and sharing a 56K dial up connection. With each new release, it does get better (looking) but seems to fall apart after time. Looks like Loop has the right idea (way to go ) Boycott Micro$haft!!

I wouldnt say I was boycotting them. Only my server, all the other machines in my house (5) are running either win2k, xp or 98. Unfortunately Linux just doesnt yet match how easy windows is, I can install windows and almost instantly I can play high quality games. I have gone through 2 guides on how to install Nvidia drivers in Linux and still cant play opengl games.

unclemojo · #20 (**permalink**) 17th July, 2002, 07:04 PM

I'm not saying you were to boycot m$oft, I'm just ranting a bit. I haven't liked the stropngarm tactics since midway into my Windows 98 experience. I haven't gone the full linux route yet because I use Macromedia and Adobe products. Wine is a bit too wimpy for me.

Coupled with a tattered past and a new Longhorn OS that will NOT be backwards compatible nor will it support any previous applications, m$oft seems to leave an unsettling feeling in my gut that screams 'go linux...think for yourself'

I only wish I had paid attention when I had the time to learn it