[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

AW: 2 pc-s LAN linux and win xp???



>
> Hi!

Hi Peeter :-)
>
> I used to have a very small LAN with 2 PC-s.
> No router. The 2nd PC is connected with the 1st one from ethernec card to
> ethernet card via a cable
> Connection is DSL with Win XP, the other PC was using 98SE, but I
> replaced
> it with Knoppix.

Hmh, of course you have a router, it's your WinXP-Box routing packages from
the internet to your local one :-)

Whether you connect the two PCs with a crossed cable (router cable) or a hub
or switch makes no difference, only thing that matter is that both machines
have ips in the same net, e.g. something like 192.168.0.1 for xp and
192.168.0.100 for knoppix both with the same subnetmask e.g. 255.255.255.0.
try to ping the xp box, try to ping the knoppix box, if this will work
you're done already. they're "talking" to each other.

> Question -- keeping my DSL connection by the means of Win XP (WAN
> MINIPORT
> PPPOE),l how can I link my Knoppix PC with the LAN? (From eth card to eth
> card)?
>

Make sure, that the WinXP Box is the default gateway (the route to the
internet), that's about it. You can define a static address for the knoppix
box, I'm not sure if DHCP will work never tried it. I always use static
addresses. The only thing that could be a problem is DNS, I'm not sure about
that. Maybe someone else can help out on that.

To use 2 PCs without a hub or switch just simply use crossed cable (which is
mainly used for connecting routers, hubs, switches).

To REALLY connect knoppix to xp (application), you can use different tools
and servers....

e.g.

tools would be (from the windows xp side)

putty - to get a login
winscp - to copy files via ssh

(only thing you need is a ssh server on knoppix, so that those tools can
connect)

tools on knoppix side

SAMBA - here you can set up shares, so you can see them as networkdrives in
your xp and vice versa


there are more for sure, but those are a good start :-)


Greets,
Simmel



Reply to: