Zero Config will display and label both infrastructure access points and ad-hoc under "show available connections".
Before you elect to use a wireless PCI card, consider where you're going to locate the computah in question. If it's buried under a desk, up against a wall, and in the middle of a tangle of wires, your range and performance will be truely awful. For a desktop, you might consider a USB radio or perhaps an ethernet connected box that has a client mode (WAP54G, WRT54G with Satori firmware, DWL-900AP+, DWL-2100, and some others).
Verizon DSL modem with a Gateway computer connected via ethernet. Gateway laptop with wireless card. Want to share the DSL connection without buying or having to buy or configure a router. Can I put a wireless PCI card in the main computer that is connected to the DSL modem and then enable ICS so the laptop can share this connection? I did this with a dialup setup with a switch and two computers but haven't done one with wireless yet. Will this work? If not, then what is the best way to do this and what is the best wireless network card for a regular PC?
Bryan Rich wrote in news: firstname.lastname@example.org:
Yeah, that's called AD-Hoc wireless networking where you put a wireless NIC in the machine that has the Internet connection and enable ICS so that the other computer with the other wireless NIC (with AD-HOC mode set on both NIC's) can get out to the Internet.
Bryan Rich wrote in news: email@example.com:
I believe the other poster has covered it. The only wireless I have dealt with is a Linksys router and card and I have had no problems to speak of using the Linksys line. You may want to consider using a wireless NAT router that provides better security on the wireless and the connection to the Internet than an Internet facing computer with a direct connection to the Internet.
If you have a choice, then go with the wireless NAT router AP or stand alone wireless AP for the security they can provide.
Bought a Microsoft AP MN-500 that has been nothing but a pain in the ass from day one. Fooled with it for two days and I've now had enough. You have to be connected to the internet to upgrade the firmware on it and I haven't been able to get it to work long enough to do that. So, I decided to go the AdHoc route you spoke of instead.
As far as security is concerned, I'm in the middle of nowhere and don't consider that to be a problem. I live in the middle of 10 acres so it a signal can get that far out then I may just sell some of my bandwidth ;-)
Thanks again guys. I really appreciate the help and Jim, I did buy a USB wireless setup because it had an antenna with it ;-)
Absolutetly. Its not really all that different with wireless than it is with hard connected ethernet, other than just configuring AdHoc. I put out wireless, using dialup, before going to broadband. Simply just enabled ICS and bridged the dialup modem to a wireless card in the PC. Imagine the same with a DSL modem, whether its coming in USB or into an ethernet NIC wouldn't be much different. Even with dialup, it worked just fine. (Slow as heck with dialup when you have a couple PC's pulling traffic though!) As Jeff Liebermann noted (he has a wealth of information!), one of the major problems with doing such is the location of computer. Especially if you are running an AdHoc "Access Point" coming out the back of a PC. I was able to improve it's performance by getting an external antenna that sat on the desk above the PC, but it still wasn't the best location.
Just my opinion, but even after getting AdHoc going, I'd probably still look into an actual wireless router/AP eventually. These animals are dirt cheap these days and the benefits are worth the few extra bucks -- i.e., built in firewalls, easily able to do port forwaring and such, able to place the router in better locations, and perhaps the best benefit is that none of your computers (or network "appliances") have to be powered for the network to remain "alive". Running through a router is also cakewalk compared to doing the whole ICS/AdHoc thing as well.
Well, I thought I could do it but not successful to this point? I have had it where I could transfer files from one computer to the other but still can't get the Laptop to use the DSL connection of the Gateway compute by using ICS? I've done this countless times with a wired system but this wireless crap is starting to get to me. I know it's probably some simple something I'm overlooking but fact remains that I can't get the internet connection I need.
Question: Which connection in Network Connections is suppose to be the one for ICS? Do I make it the verizon DSL one or the wireless one? I have it set for the verizon connection but no luck. I also have the verizon connection set as a Peer to Peer connection. Called Belkin hoping to get some help from them but when I told the guy I had transferred an 83MB file from one puter to the other he said sorry, can't help with the internet connection because that is part of the windowz system. So, now i'm back to shit that doesn't work, again!!
Nathan wrote in news: firstname.lastname@example.org:
It's been a loooooong time since I last used ICS on a gateway computer (NAT router makes life easier) but as I recall the Internet facing NIC should have ICS enabled. It could be that the standard protocols for the NIC's and for the wireless NIC are not right.
What O/S(s) are being used?
What protocols and what not are being used on the NIC(s)?
Windowz XP Home on both boxes. TCP/IP on both wireless adapters. Using workgroup for SSID. Static IP addresses.
On my previous dialup connection ICS was enabled on the dialup itself? Not the NIC. The DSL connection is essentially a dialup also, kinda, so that's why I enabled ICS on that one/ It is the one I want to share. I did try it on the wireless one also though and it didn't work with it either. Now I can't even get file sharing to work so I guess I've screwed up something else trying to get the internet connection working. The icon in the tray says I have a connection but i can't access it. Oh well, shit happens I guess. Tomorrow is another day and maybe it will look different then.