computer network ideas

[Seraph]

I am looking for some form of solution.

Let's say I have 2 machine on 2 differnet subnets.

Machine A and Machine B

Machine A is my NS1 and Machine B is my NS2.

NS1 is going to be my front end webserver as well as NS. But the actual pages are on shared drive on NS2.

I can use VPN so that NS1 can have access to NS2's shared drives.

Now, how can I get NS1 on VPN without losing it's own network connection.

Oh. both of them currently have 1 NIC. Do I need more than one for what I wanted to do?


I did a similear setup a couple of years back but I can't seem to recall how I did it.

[b3lha]

What OS are you using? Unix? Windows? Mac?

I'm a unix guy, so I can't tell you exactly how to do it on any other platform. The principle remains the same however.

You only need one NIC in each machine and you should regard the VPN connection as a "virtual NIC". Hence each machine has two network interfaces.

First you have to make sure that the two machines can talk to each other (ping). You need some way of routing between subnet A and subnet B. Perhaps you have a router or something like that?

Once you have that in place, you can setup the IP addresses on the VPN "virtual NICs" as a third subnet - which both machines are on.

At this point, the machines should be able to talk to each other across the VPN and talk to their own respective networks as normal. Then check that you can still access the internet via your router (or normal default route).
Phil.

[Seraph]

cool. Makes sense.

If it was linux, it would be so much easier. I am using 2k server on one and 2k3 server on the other.


I just picked up a 1.7Ghz Dual Xenon with full SCSI and such (IBM IntelliStation) for free last week so I thought I might as well make that as one of my other servers and I don't know if I could run 2 NS machines from behind a router (same IP to the rest of the world).

I can't think straight lately and that's what I do for living so perhaps I should look for something else to do.

[Sonar]

Just curious, why do you need a VPN to access the "other" computer?

Normally you just tell IIS5/6? that you have a virtual directory on the other computer, and put in the UNC path to that share.



/Sonny (MCP, MCP+I, MCSE, MCSE2k, MCT, CNA, CNE, A+, NETWORK+ and most of all UNIX )

[glide]

Did you guys ever do anything with Group Policy?

I have a 2000 server that I need to role a policy out of to a select group of users. I have only been able to get the policy to go network wide, which isn't good when your trying to lock a machine down.

[Seraph]

Originally posted by Sonar
Just curious, why do you need a VPN to access the "other" computer?

Normally you just tell IIS5/6? that you have a virtual directory on the other computer, and put in the UNC path to that share.



/Sonny (MCP, MCP+I, MCSE, MCSE2k, MCT, CNA, CNE, A+, NETWORK+ and most of all UNIX )

NS1 and NS2 are on 2 different subnets. NS1 is hosting the virtual directory on NS2.


Anyways, I got it done. 2 extra NICs and a x-over cable did the trick

[Earthworm]

Looks like we've got a few network experts here on the site.

I'd like to think that I'm fairly knowledgable when it comes to computers/networking. I also work in an environment with access to other experts.

[glide]

I never did post, but I finally got the group policy issue figured out. Sometimes you just have to take a step back for a minute.

[Earthworm]

Did you gave to create a new group or were you not sure where to find the option?

I'm going to be playing around with a Win2003 Active Directory on my home network soon.

[glide]

We kept applying the policy to the entire domain, not a pretty site. Once we got past that, it just didn't work. We had to move the actual object to the container that had the policy we wanted to apply.

I have heard that group policies in 2003 are a lot easier. I plan to upgrade our DC this summer and migrate it to 2003.

[mohrds]

Originally posted by glide
I have heard that group policies in 2003 are a lot easier.

You heard wrong

Sorry I didn't read this thread earlier, I could have answered everyone's questions...

I've been working so much, the last thing I want to read is a thread about computers!

Doug

[Seraph]

Originally posted by glide
I plan to upgrade our DC this summer and migrate it to 2003.

I run a 2k3 boxes at home. It does take a little whille to get used to. But if your DC is working fine, don't touch it. 2k3 Migration is not as simple as they say and butchering can be done easily.

But then again, why upgrade to 2k3 when black comb will be out in a couple of years.

[glide]

I'll take that into considerartion.

Right now our DC and file server are one in the same. I need to seperate the two. I was going to get a new server for the DC. Maybe I'll just get a new file server and leave the DC alone.

That does sound easier.

The reason I had thought about 2003, is because i am looking at Exchange 2003. However, after looking at some IMAP clients I am leaning that way.

[UberRoo]

I'm running Apache on my W2k box and I remember ages ago when I set it up, it made a big stink when I tried to point it to files on a mapped drive. I was in a hurry and just wanted to get it working so I installed Apache on the other computer too. In the "httpd.conf" file there's a ProxyPass setting. It works much like a drive mapping or DOS subst command, but it's http.

ProxyPass /server_directory_as_it_should_appear_to_clients/ http://localhost_of_second_machine/directory/

I haven't played with Microsoft's answer to this, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was similar. Shoot, I would think they'd have several integrated routing solutions to this. I never much liked drive mappings and VPN solutions, so I've installed Apache and an FTP server on all my machines. The overhead is surprisingly low, but the convenience is wonderful. Remote Access rocks.

[Seraph]

My daily choice of HTTP server would be Apache. But with my current setup, I am forced to run IIS6.