LAN to WLAN bridge slows network to 1Mbps

[MattSpew 0]

The setup:

Win2003 networked to XpHE via the WLAN at 54Mbps.

Win2003 networked to Xp Pro via LAN at 100Mbps.

 

I want Xp Pro to share files with XpHE, so I bridge the LAN and WLAN with Win2003.

Bridging the 2 network cards slows the WLAN down to 1Mbps.

As soon as I delete to bridge the wireless network jumps back to 54Mbps. :x

 

Anyone know a work around for this?

[evaldez 0]

Why are you bridging anything? Just plug in your 2003 box and your xp box into the switch on the back of the wireless device. Or, if you are connecting into a larger 100Mb network, connect the wireless switch up to that using the uplink (or equivelant) port on the wireless device.

[MattSpew 0]

It's Ad-hoc wireless from Win2003 and XpHE. I don't have an AP.

Both Win2003 and XpHE have wirless PCI cards.

 

Setup:

 

|--------Wirless(p2p)--------XpHE

|

|

Win2003(with Wirless card and 10/100 LAN card)<--->modem<--->net

|

|

|--------LAN(cat5)----------XpPro

 

For both XpHE and XpPro to share the internet, and for XpPro to be able to see the printer in XpHE, I need to bridge the connection between the 10/100 card and the wireless card.

 

But as soon as I bridge the connection the wireless PCI card in Win2003 drops back to 1Mbps.

[clutch 1]

Multi-homing a system (using more than one NIC) can cause serious issues for many admins. Are both networks on different subnets? Say, have the hardline network on 192.168.1.0/24 (255.255.255.0 for the subnet mask) and the WLAN on 192.168.2.0/24 (ditto on the subnet mask). This might remove any confusion on the part of the server as to which NIC is being used, if they were both on the same network. Once the networks are setup, you might need to setup RRAS (that's what I have done in these situations for my needs, but there used to be a way in NT where you could simply enable IP Forwarding on the NICs. Unfortunately, I can't remember how to set that up in Windows 2000/2003. Here is an article on setting up RRAS to make a 2003 box act like a router:

 

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;323355

[MattSpew 0]

;( I'm not going to pretend I know 100% what you're telling my, but I'll have a go..

 

Orginaly I had:

 

<--->internal modem<-->Win2003(With ICS)<---LAN--->XpPro..

 

Win2003 IP - 192.168.0.1/255.255.255.0

XpPro IP - DHCP from Win2003(LAN)

Speed - 100Mbps

 

 

Then I added a wireless cards to Win2003 and XpHE and gave them simple IPs:

 

Win2003 Wireless IP - 10.0.0.1/255.0.0.0

XpHE Wireless IP - 10.0.0.2/255.0.0.0

Speed - 54Mbps to 36Mbps (Mostly held 54Mbps)

 

I then just disabled ICS on Win2003, highlighted the LAN and WLAN connection and clicked Bridge.

 

Now I have:

 

Win2003 Bridged IP - 192.168.0.1/255.255.255.0

XpPro IP - DHCP from Win2003(LAN)

XpHE IP - DHCP from Win2003(WLAN)

LAN Speed - 100Mbps

WLAN Speed - 1Mbps

 

I let Win2003 handle everything. Everything is working, all computers can access the net via Win2003, all computers can share printers and files. It's just the speed on the wireless 1/2 of the network that I want to boost.

I'll play with "Routing and Remote Access" as soon as my download finishes.

 

Cheers

[clutch 1]

Ahhhhh.... Very good. It looks like you had it going ok, but going with RRAS will probably be a better solution.

[MattSpew 0]

Quote:

Ahhhhh.... Very good. It looks like you had it going ok, but going with RRAS will probably be a better solution.

Yeah all I have to do now is work out how to use RRAS. :x

[madacgrav 0]

I know this is prolly not what you might want to do but there is an easier way of handling this situation for only like 60 bucks.

 

Buy a wireless router (linksys or whatever) that has a switch built in.

 

 

|- XPpro (directly connected)

Internet ---> wirelessrouter |- Win2k3 (directly connected)

|

|

|- XPhe (wireless)

 

This is way is more secure (only one place to add security) and it does not leave you win2k3 server as vunerable to the outside world. This also is less confusing on the network (everything on one subnet). I know that you might not want to spend money but this will allow for better future growth that will be cheaper to implement. One last thing, this will also allows your win2k3 server to better use its resources(i.e. not wasting on routing).

[clutch 1]

Just to clarify, but there isn't much going on resource wise for Windows 2003 server to route traffic, especially in this scenario. In addition, setting up the simple firewall in RRAS would make the system (and network) quite secure. You can later setup the server to host VPN connections as well, in addition to other technologies that consumer routers have issues with.

[madacgrav 0]

Ofcourse you are correct but that just seems a waste of a server. Then again i do not know how the current server is used. That just seems to over complicate a simple network and potentially have two holes in your network instead of one.

[clutch 1]

I was basing workload off of him having XP Home and XP Pro comprising his network. With this layout, I don't see much of a workload. Setting up the firewall should be done by most people anyway, so security wouldn't be changed (probably increased) with the use of RRAS. Plus, he gets to save money and space by not using the router. Not a bad deal overall.

[MattSpew 0]

I haven't had a chance to play with anything.

 

As for work load, the server main rolls are IIS(ASP Forum), RDP, ICS, Hamster(News server, NNTP) and file backup for the 2 Xp boxes.

 

I really can't be arsed playing with RRAS, one, I don't really know how to use it and 2, it's a simple 3 computer network mainly used as a dialup gateway.

 

There has to be a simple way to boost the WLAN speed.

RWIN, TTL and MTU???

[clutch 1]

I doubt those will address the issue, as this is a major drop in speed and not some minor drop that you are trying to tweak. If you don't want to use RRAS, that's cool. I just feel that setting the server up as a router (which is what are you trying to do with linking the networks) would be better suited with RRAS. When a server has two NICs sitting on the same segment (and not bound together to form a virtual connection) you can get odd behavior. Setting it up as a router using two different networks would be a good solution. You can find walkthroughs (like the one I posted earlier) all over the place to set it up. If you can properly administer IIS, then this will not be an issue. Otherwise, get a separate router as suggested earlier.