how to implement multi-IP address, or multi-interface, or a virtual tcp/ip driver in Windos XP with

  • Thread starter Thread starter peter
  • Start date Start date
P

peter

I have only one network adapter, and need to access 2 networks in LAN at the
same time using Windows XP professional. Their IDs look like this
192.168.0.x(255.255.255.0) and 192.168.10.x(255.255.255.0). How can I do
this?

Thanks

Peter
 
You can add a few IPs to the adapter in TCP properties for your adapter (
Advanced button )
Arkady
 
My case is I connect to one of network using DHCP. I want to connect to
another network using static IP. How should I do?

Thanks
 
'Probably' you can configure a dynamic and static IP address on the same adapter by using Regedt32:

IPAddress
Key: Tcpip\Parameters\Interfaces\interface

Value Type: REG_MULTI_SZ--list of dotted-decimal IP addresses

Valid Range: Any set of valid IP addresses

Default: None

Description: This parameter specifies the IP addresses of the IP interfaces to be bound to the adapter. If the first address in the list is 0.0.0.0, the primary interface on the adapter is configured from DHCP. A system with more than one IP interface for an adapter is logically multihomed. There must be a valid subnet mask value in the SubnetMask parameter for each IP address that is specified in this parameter. To add parameters with Regedt32.exe, select this key and type the list of IP addresses, pressing Enter after each one. Then go to the SubnetMask parameter, and type a corresponding list of subnet masks.

It's kind of unusual to have two different networks on the same physical segment. If these networks are separated by a router, then you need to configure a routing solution and multiple IP addresses will not help you.

Doug Sherman
MCSE Win2k/NT4.0, MCSA, MCP+I, MVP
 
That exactly what property dlg allow you , you can see two tabs : General
( like DHCP ) and second - Alternative Configuration ( for IP direct e.g. )
Arkady
 
You can buy another cheap Nic for $15 dollars and avoid the whole "twisted"
issue.
 
He's asking about adding a second IP# that is not part of the same subnet.
IP#s on a Nic are supposed to be all from the same subnet because all of the
other TCP/IP settings are "global" for the entire Nic and apply to every IP#
running on it. You may get "lucky" if they both happen to be using the same
subnet mask (although I'd still never do it), but if they use a different
mask you are screwed because you can only have one mask per Nic.
 
No, in alternative tab of TCP property dlg you can add additional IP/subnet
masks for multihome computer
Arkady

Phillip Windell said:
He's asking about adding a second IP# that is not part of the same subnet.
IP#s on a Nic are supposed to be all from the same subnet because all of
the
other TCP/IP settings are "global" for the entire Nic and apply to every
IP#
running on it. You may get "lucky" if they both happen to be using the
same
subnet mask (although I'd still never do it), but if they use a different
mask you are screwed because you can only have one mask per Nic.


--

Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com


Bob I said:
Static IP address, enter the addresses as desired.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Arkady Frenkel said:
No, in alternative tab of TCP property dlg you can add additional IP/subnet
masks for multihome computer
Arkady
Click to expand...

Ah! You're right. Sorry. But I still would avoid it. Running two IP
Networks on the same wire just isnt a very good idea. There should be a law
against it,...it's like a guy wereing a dress or something,...it should be
defined as a "act of terrorism" maybe.
 
Agree with you , but XP by itself give such opportunity called bridge option
( in Advanced menu of Network connections )
Arkady
 
Arkady Frenkel said:
Agree with you , but XP by itself give such opportunity called bridge option
( in Advanced menu of Network connections )
Arkady
Click to expand...

Well, yea,..but that isn't the same thing. That would be two Nics in the
same subnet, not two IP#s from different subnets ont he same Nic. Of course
I don't like this "bridging stuff" they came up with (XP & 2003)
either,...there are too many better ways to do things like that.
 
Back
Top