Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1996 17:47:26 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Cc: terry@lambert.org, nate@mt.sri.com, freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org, FreeBSD-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: It works! Solved my problem wih Etherlink III on AcerNote Light Message-ID: <199612110047.RAA05309@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199612102212.PAA09166@rocky.mt.sri.com> from "Nate Williams" at Dec 10, 96 03:12:49 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > In other words, if I have a local network connection, and I dial > > up my pop account at my ISP, then Windows95 tends to screw up the > > routing while the connection is up. > > It certainly shouldn't, and doesn't on any of my boxes. Try running *any* proxy server for going from NETBEUI or IPX based winsock.dll or wsock32.dll clients to a Windows95 box running the proxy server to gate the socket calls. If the Win95 box has a local network connection and supports RAS, when a RAS connection is present, all packets will be sent to the RAS connection, even if only one client has specified a RAS port for its connection and all other clients have specified using the local network connection. You would run into this if you have a branch office connected by intermittent connection instead of dedicated line. You don't notice that it's sending all the packets to the wrong place if your test setup also has a local (real) net connection. But it is. As far as why it happens, well, Win95 does not support routing between local cards based on subnet correctly -- ie: a Win95 box is not a router. This relates to the original topic in that a Win95 box with two network interfaces "named" the same network address will act as you described -- IF you do not need it to route. Anyway, this is all very special case, and is probably more interesting to people into nomadic computing that the majority of the people on this list. I was just curious as to what would happen when it was put in this environment (in case that's what he meant when he said he had another machine with a "near identical setup" which worked... it might have been non-FreeBSD. Back to your regularly scheduled postings... Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199612110047.RAA05309>