From: "Lewis G Rosenthal" Received: from [192.168.100.201] (account lgrosenthal HELO [192.168.200.24]) by 2rosenthals.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.16) with ESMTPSA id 2876604 for virtualized_ecs_users@2rosenthals.com; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:30:03 -0400 Message-ID: <4AAE3749.9050100@2rosenthals.com> Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:30:01 -0400 Organization: Rosenthal & Rosenthal, LLC User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (OS/2; U; Warp 4.5; en-US; rv:1.8.1.22) Gecko/20090704 MultiZilla/1.8.3.5g SeaMonkey/1.1.17 (PmW) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Virtualized eCS Users Mailing List Subject: Re: [Virtualized eCS]Accessing network shares from guest References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Ed... On 09/14/09 01:07 am, Ed Durrant thus wrote : > Lewis G Rosenthal wrote: >> >> >> A bridge is a bit different. A bridge connects two physically >> disparate networks (wireless and wired, or coaxial and twisted pair >> or even fiber and twisted pair) to the same *logical* network. > Unless the definition has been "adapted" lately, I learned that a > bridge is a transparent connection between two networks. A bridge > allows NETBIOS to traverse between toe physical networks where a > router does not (as it only allows IP traffic through) > A bridge connects two different topologies to the same logical network. It does not route. Thus, when configuring a DSL "box" for "dumb" mode (where the authentication and routing is handled in a router somewhere behind it), it is considered to be in "bridge" mode (as it is simply bridging the ethernet to the copper phone wire). As a result, protocols which do not route will travel happily across a bridge, as it's all the same logical network. So, in that sense, bridges are transparent. Bridges work at layer 2 of the OSI model, the data-link layer, and know only about MAC addresses; in contrast, routers work at layer 3, the network layer, and understand IP addresses. Thus, routers can traverse entire networks but bridges only connect multiple physical segments to the *same* network. > In any case, coming back to IP - if the systems are configured on > different IP Subnets, as Lewis says, the only way to allow traffic to > cross the networks is to use a router. In the early days of SVista/2 > one had to configure a route statement in a physical external router > (such as ADSL or Wifi router) before it could communicate with the > local machine - it sounds like something similar here. > Andy figured out the same thing to get VirtualPC to work with a wireless network card. > In fact with that route in place and TCPBEUI (NETBIOS over IP) > configured, you may well be able to reach your wife's Windoze box from > the W2K running i VBOX - which I think was the original intention. > Yes, as long as the Windows box is configured for TCPBEUI, as well. > Of course if you could simply share the local subnet in the first > place all of this would be unnecessary so perhaps it's worth tracking > down why that fails - it works for me when I run WinXP in VBox/2. > Personally, I think that's a more productive use of Cliff's time and effort. ;-) -- Lewis ------------------------------------------------------------- Lewis G Rosenthal, CNA, CLP, CLE Rosenthal & Rosenthal, LLC www.2rosenthals.com Need a managed Wi-Fi hotspot? www.hautspot.com Secure, stable, operating system www.ecomstation.com -------------------------------------------------------------