On Thursday 13 Feb 2003 11:46 am, Adolfo Bello wrote: > On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 05:46, Anne Wilson wrote: > > On Thursday 13 Feb 2003 1:31 am, Adolfo Bello wrote: > > > On Wed, 2003-02-12 at 04:15, fifner the dragon wrote: > > > > You understood perfectly. > > > > > > > > I do not want to use DHCP to connect my LAN to the server. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Fifner > > > > > > Just let undefined the gateway in the W2K TCP/IP setup. > > > > > > (And set a policy so just the Administrator can change the TCP/IP > > > settings). > > > > Wouldn't this be better all on one subnet? Surely then the lan will > > behave properly, but without a gateway the W2K machine won't be able to > > get out? Or is this because I'm thinking router, and sharing a dial-up > > would be different? > > > > Anne > > Hi Anne: > > Exactly what this fellow wants: denying W2K to get out. Of course, for > W2k to see the router box they have to be in the same subnet. > > I don't see any difference when sharing a dial-up connection but that > kernel routing tables in the router machine are set automatically when > the dial-up connection is started and last until dial-up connection is > closed. > > Is this what you were asking?
Yes - it seemed to me that he (or someone in the thread) was talking of putting the W2K machine on another subnet. Couldn't see the point of that, since it would not reach the lan at all. Anne -- Registered Linux User No.293302
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
