Can Ping but NOT vice versa

[EasyUp Web Hosting]

Does this look familiar?

 

[Heinz-W]

Does this look familiar?

If you take away the "green" client pc's then yes, that's what I'm trying to achieve.
ADSL IP 192.168.0.1
Office and Staff PC's - 192.168.0.10 to 12
SRV PC IP 192.168.0.5 (NIC1)
SRV PC IP 192.168.0.2 (NIC2) -----> Router (switch) then to ...
10 Customer PC's IP 192.168.0.131 thru 141
All on Subnet 255.255.255.0

 

[Heinz-W]

I need to go out for 1hr or so ... I'll pick up your comments / suggestions when I get back ...

Thank you so much guys ..... this has been driving me crazy for about 3 days now but it looks like light at teh end of the tunnel - cheers

 

[EasyUp Web Hosting]

K, green is actually the "staff" pcs then. Non the less, there are 3 pcs connected.

K, then I agree with what everyone is suggesting, splitting the network up.

Left of the server incl nic, you can leave standard, otherwise you need to change the printer as well and all the drivers etc...

Tight of the server incl nic, change to 10.0.0.x mask 255.0.0.0, I choose this, cause then you can't make a mistake and type 192.168.0.x instead of 192.168.1.x

You still need to route traffic from network 1 to network 2 and vice versa. I will google and check if there is a small app that we can use, but ideally you should have gone for a server OS on the server...

Edit: Think this might help, it's what we us on Server OS.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc754634(WS.10).aspx

 

[Heinz-W]

I BOW DOWN TO YOU ALL MY NETWORK MASTERS !!!!
GREAT ... ALL IS WORKING 100% ..... THANK YOU SO, SO MUCH !!!

 

[xrapidx]

Solution?

 

[Grep]

different subnets

 

[ponder]

Something you get taught in early networking (CCNA if memory serves me correct), you cant perform routing with two (or more) interfaces in the same subnet.

Implications of Multiple Network Interfaces on the Same Network

Sometimes network managers feel the need to provide greater availability and performance by adding a second network adapter to a particular machine. For example, they may want to have two token-ring adapters attached to the same physical network. While it is possible to have more than one interface on the same network, in general this is not recommended for two reasons:

1. Having two interfaces on the same network is a violation of TCP/IP architecture.

In TCP/IP architecture, a host machine with two network adapters is defined as an IP router. Different network adapters must be attached to different physical networks. In the case of token-ring, TCP/IP addresses multiple rings bridged together as a single logical ring (as if it were a single physical ring).
2. Having two interfaces on the same network can cause broadcast storms.

Whenever an IP host sees traffic for a network whose IP address is different from its own network, it generates an Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) packet announcing this conflict. Since every host on the network sees the traffic that is misaddressed, every host generates ICMP packets. If the amount of misaddressed traffic is significant, the ICMP traffic can grow to the point that network performance degrades.

It is possible to avoid the broadcast storms created when multiple interfaces are connected to the same network. However, doing so is still a violation of TCP/IP architecture. The solution is to give the different interfaces different IP addresses on the same network. For example, you might have two token-ring adapters on the same network named tr0 and tr1. You must assign distinct IP addresses and names to tr0 and tr1. (TCP/IP architecture requires that each interface have a unique IP address and name; otherwise, unpredictable behavior will result.) For instance, you might give interface tr0 the IP address 10.10.10.1 and the name laurel.foo.bar.com, and interface tr1 the IP address 10.10.10.2 and the name hardy.foo.bar.com.