Velocity Reviews - P2P that gets internet access from a server/client network ?

On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 14:10:57 -0500, "Frank_G" <someone@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Newbie here at networking, so please forgive me if I dont use the correct
>terms or even
>phrase my question correctly. Hopefully I will make my intent clear. I want
>to set up a small P2P and then integrate it with an existing network in
>order to gain internet access for the P2P.

A bit of terminology:

A workgroup is a network without a central server that other computers
authenticate against. All computers are equal.

A domain is a network with a central server (a "domain controller")
that other computers authenticate against. The domain controller
controls access to computers on the domain.

Workgroups and domains are different types of LANs (Local Area
Networks).

P2P usually refers to file-swapping programs like Kazaa. You may set
up a peer-to-peer workgroup (as opposed to a domain with a server),
but it's confusing to call it P2P. To clarify your above statement:
you want to set up a small peer-to-peer workgroup and grant internet
access to computers on this workgroup by connecting them to another
LAN with an existing internet connection.

>The Big Picture:
>A school has a Server/Clients network of about 10 or more machines for
>faculty use only - not for student access.

Is there an actual server server -- e.g. NT4 Server, or Windows 2000
Server, acting as a domain controller? Or is this just a glorified
peer-to-peer network as well?

>Internet connection (isp) is via a local cable company.
>
>In one of the classrooms there is a particular computer (Win98) that has a
>nic and is connected to the internet via this network. It is generally used
>by the teacher & occasionally under supervision by students.
>
>The Smaller Picture:
>There are 8 other Win98 machines in this particular classroom. I have been
>helping the teacher to 'tune-up' these computers and installing a nic in
>each in preparation for a small local P2P where they can share files and
>printers; and eventually internet access.
>
>The Old Plan:
>The plan was to attach each machine to a switch. Actually there are two
>tables with 4 or 5 machines on each, so there would be a switch on each
>table. Then, I was intending to attach the switches together; and then
>attach the swtch/es to a router (either a cable from each switch to the
>router or one cable from one switch - a separate question though). This
>router was
>going to be attached to a cable modem which would connect to a new
>feed/access point
>coming into the classroom.

That would work.

>The New Plan & the Question:
>Since there is already a cable feed into the classroom and there is already
>one machine with internet access, from the existing network, instead of
>getting a new dedicated cable feed, can we hook up the local P2P to only get
>internet access WITHOUT giving the students access to the faculty network?

Can you? Yes. Is it advisable? Maybe.

>And if so how to configure the P2P - and to include the one machine that is
>connected to the existing network ?

What do you mean, "include"?

I could suggest this:

You have an existing NT domain. (Call it the TEACHERS domain.)
Configure the computers on TEACHER with User-Level security. That
way, any resources that are shared on them are only available to other
computers that are authenticated on that domain as well.

You will create a new workgroup. (Call it the STUDENTS workgroup.)
Confiure the computers on STUDENTS with share-level security. Share
whatever you want with whatever passwords (or no passwords) you want.
The shares will be available to everyone, or at least everyone who can
authenticate with the correct password.

The particular Win98 computer you mention above that is used by both
teachers and students can be on either. If it needs to access other
shares on the TEACHERS domain, put it on TEACHERS. If it doesn't, put
it on STUDENTS. If other student computers need access to it, don't
give it user-level security; give it share-level security. (If I've
understood your situation correctly, I would guess you end up putting
it on TEACHERS but only giving it share-level security so that
STUDENTS computers can access its shared resources.)

NB that Win98 computers are NOT terribly secure. If there is
sensitive information on this ostensibly "secure" domain, you should
NOT have anything less than Windows NT4 computers on it -- preferably
Windows 2000. Get educational licenses, do whatever -- but get rid of
Windows 98.

I could also suggest you consider subnetting so that the two networks
don't share the same logical address space. You'll probably want to
read up on that. :)

However, I will suggest neither. See below.

>Background:
>I have done a small lan P2P before, using the same Workgroup name and giving
>each machine a different name, using straight through cat 5 cables to a
>router and using TCP/IP as the only protocol to share files and printers -
>the settings were very simple& I was going to setup an exact repeat of this
>"formula" :
>In the Configuration tab I had - Client for MS Networks (Quick Logon), File
>& Printer Sharing, the NIC card & the TCP/IP for the NIC.
>And the Primary Network Logon = Windows Logon.
>The TCP/IP properties were simple with - Obtain IP automatically, Use DHCP,
>no Gateway, Disable Wins, & Bindings = File&Printer sharing & Client for MS
>networks.
>
>Now, when I look at the one computer in the classroom which is already
>connected to the internet, it's settings are a little different and I'm not
>sure how to deal with that - I know my old settings worked for me ?
>Instead, it has MS Family Logon as the Primary Network Logon instead of
>Windows
>logon.In Client for MS Networks>Properties it has Logon and Restore Network
>connections instead of Quick Logon. And the bindings are Client for MS
>Networks & MS Family Logon.
>As it is, I dont think the computers will "see" this one or be "seen" by it
>(network
>neighbourhood). If I change it to be the same as the others it may lose it's
>capability on the existing network & it's internet connection. If I leave
>this one as it is then my P2P settings 'formula' will not work.
>
>Maybe the original plan of a separate router & modem and cable feed is still
>best ? Advice please.

If by "best" you mean "simplest, easiest, and most secure"...
Definitely..

Cheers,
dan