Sharing Broadband With Only Switch - Network

This is a discussion on Sharing Broadband With Only Switch - Network ; Hello Networkers, Scenario: [Internet] | [Fast Ethernet Switch] / | \ [Comp1] [Comp 2] [Comp3] We have a cable modem that supplies 512kbps broadband internet. We have 3 computers and would like to share the connection, so we bought a ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Sharing Broadband With Only Switch

  1. Sharing Broadband With Only Switch

    Hello Networkers,

    Scenario:

    [Internet]
    |
    [Fast Ethernet Switch]
    / | \
    [Comp1] [Comp 2] [Comp3]


    We have a cable modem that supplies 512kbps broadband internet. We have 3
    computers and would like to share the connection, so we bought a fast
    ethernet switch for just ?16/11 and a bunch of CAT5 cables. We soon
    discovered that the ISP binds the internet connection to the MAC address of
    the NIC in the computer that first makes the connection to the internet.
    Consequently, the other computers are precluded from using the internet.

    The "solution" was to spoof the MAC address of the NICs in the two other
    computers to fool the ISP into thinking it was the same NIC in all three
    computers. Hence, all three computers could access the internet with THE
    SAME IP address. Brilliant! Well no. Although this is a good quick-fix I
    have discovered that two computers cannot transfer data to/from the
    internet simultaneously and, worse still, if a computer starts a download
    and is then interrupted by a second computer starting a download, the fist
    computer will not complete the download. It freezes.

    Now, my question: Do I HAVE TO buy a broadband router, or is there another
    cunning way of getting around this without shelling out ?80/40? I could
    use one of the computers as a router, but then this computer needs to be on
    all the time. Surely there's a sneakier way?

    --
    Nick

  2. Re: Sharing Broadband With Only Switch

    Gardener wrote:

    >Hello Networkers,
    >
    >Scenario:
    >
    > [Internet]
    > |
    >[Fast Ethernet Switch]
    > / | \
    >[Comp1] [Comp 2] [Comp3]
    >
    >
    >We have a cable modem that supplies 512kbps broadband internet. We have 3
    >computers and would like to share the connection, so we bought a fast
    >ethernet switch for just ?16/11 and a bunch of CAT5 cables. We soon
    >discovered that the ISP binds the internet connection to the MAC address of
    >the NIC in the computer that first makes the connection to the internet.
    >Consequently, the other computers are precluded from using the internet.
    >
    >The "solution" was to spoof the MAC address of the NICs in the two other
    >computers to fool the ISP into thinking it was the same NIC in all three
    >computers. Hence, all three computers could access the internet with THE
    >SAME IP address. Brilliant! Well no. Although this is a good quick-fix I
    >have discovered that two computers cannot transfer data to/from the
    >internet simultaneously and, worse still, if a computer starts a download
    >and is then interrupted by a second computer starting a download, the fist
    >computer will not complete the download. It freezes.
    >
    >Now, my question: Do I HAVE TO buy a broadband router, or is there another
    >cunning way of getting around this without shelling out ?80/40? I could
    >use one of the computers as a router, but then this computer needs to be on
    >all the time. Surely there's a sneakier way?
    >
    >
    >

    You really need to consider a router for another reason. When your
    computer is directly receiving an IP address from your ISP, your
    computer is exposed to the Internet. Using a router, your computer will
    have a local (not-Internet) address with the router using NAT (network
    address translation). This provides a great deal of protection even in
    the absence of any other protection systems such as firewalls (which you
    may also have in the router).

    Some routers are as cheap as switches.

  3. Re: Sharing Broadband With Only Switch


    At the very least, you will need a second network card for one of the PCs.
    then, assuming you are running Windows 98 or later on the PC with the
    second NIC, you can set up Internet Connection Sharing to share the network
    conection to the other PCs. You will then also be able to share files
    locally.

    I would strongly recommend a hardware router; you can probably find one on
    the net for like $30 or so,


    Gardener wrote:

    > Hello Networkers,
    >
    > Scenario:
    >
    > [Internet]
    > |
    > [Fast Ethernet Switch]
    > / | \
    > [Comp1] [Comp 2] [Comp3]
    >
    >
    > We have a cable modem that supplies 512kbps broadband internet. We have 3
    > computers and would like to share the connection, so we bought a fast
    > ethernet switch for just ?16/£11 and a bunch of CAT5 cables. We soon
    > discovered that the ISP binds the internet connection to the MAC address
    > of the NIC in the computer that first makes the connection to the
    > internet. Consequently, the other computers are precluded from using the
    > internet.
    >
    > The "solution" was to spoof the MAC address of the NICs in the two other
    > computers to fool the ISP into thinking it was the same NIC in all three
    > computers. Hence, all three computers could access the internet with THE
    > SAME IP address. Brilliant! Well no. Although this is a good quick-fix I
    > have discovered that two computers cannot transfer data to/from the
    > internet simultaneously and, worse still, if a computer starts a download
    > and is then interrupted by a second computer starting a download, the fist
    > computer will not complete the download. It freezes.
    >
    > Now, my question: Do I HAVE TO buy a broadband router, or is there another
    > cunning way of getting around this without shelling out ?80/£40? I could
    > use one of the computers as a router, but then this computer needs to be
    > on all the time. Surely there's a sneakier way?
    >



+ Reply to Thread