• Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 1937
  • Last Modified:

SBS 2003 behind DD-WRT wireless bridge - proper DHCP setup?

I currently have a small peer 2 peer network setup using 2 Linksys WRT54G wireless routers in order to bring my DSL service into an area of my home that has no wired phone service. The setup is based on this article [http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/tutorials/article.php/3639271] and is working very well. All wireless clients are receiveing dynamic, natted ip addresses from the Primary WRT-54G attached to the Sprint 660 modem and all are able to browse the internet. They are all on the same subnet (192.168.1.X 255.255.255.0) which was necessary for peer 2 peer browsing. So why would I want to mess with it you ask.

I need to add a server to the mix so that I can access the network remotely and sell servers and SBS 2003 to clients. I would like to use remote workplace, VPN, etc.

I know SBS is happiest if it is doing DHCP itself (I will be using the built in Exchange server as well so I need DNS and Active Directory to be happy)

I am looking at this configuration:
http://www.smallbizserver.net/tabid/266/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/76/Two-Nics-a-static-IP-address-ISA-router.aspx

Please offer suggestions........
0
entre-tcv
Asked:
entre-tcv
  • 5
  • 3
1 Solution
 
rolustCommented:
Hi

Do you have a static IP or are you going to use DYNDNS or equal?

Robert Lundqvist
Small Business Specialist
Sweden
0
 
Jeffrey Kane - TechSoEasyPrincipal ConsultantCommented:
( Robert... I'm not sure what it matters whether you have a static IP or dynamic with regards to this question-- plus he stated he has a static IP.)


So... Yes, SBS is happiest being the DHCP Server.

That article is good if you want to use a dual NIC configuration, but you don't necessarily need to.

Are you saying that you want your SBS to be on the wireless part of the network?  I wouldn't suggest that if you can avoid it, but it's certainly do-able.

It would be best if you put it at the DSN Modem source, and then ran your wireless off of it per this article:
http://sbsurl.com/wireless

Also, Microsoft provides great documentation for migrating from a peer-to-peer network into SBS 2003:
http://technet2.microsoft.com/WindowsServerSolutions/SBS/en/library/d21aeb6a-dffb-4898-adde-8b378db50fd81033.mspx?mfr=true

Jeff
TechSoEasy


0
 
entre-tcvAuthor Commented:
Thank you both for "working" on the weekend!

I do have a static IP addy , Rolust.

Tech So Easy, The reason that there are 2 wrt-54gs is that I do not have a direct wired connection to the DSL modem.

My setup is this:

DSL=>primary WRT54g (DHCP)=>wireless bridge=>2ndary WRT54g(DD-WRT "joined" to the MAC address of the primary, no DHCP also acting as switch)=>wired and wireless users

The DSL is downstairs and my home office is upstairs (as will be the SBS server). So I can't place the server at the modem source. That would certainly be my preference both for speed and not having to bother with the wireless bridge in the first place.

Thanks
0
NEW Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows

Backup and recover physical and cloud-based servers and workstations, as well as endpoint devices that belong to remote users. Avoid downtime and data loss quickly and easily for Windows-based physical or public cloud-based workloads!

 
Jeffrey Kane - TechSoEasyPrincipal ConsultantCommented:
Is it not possible to run Cat-5 cable upstairs?  Because the SBS will not perform well at all on a Wireless WAN Connection.

Jeff
TechSoEasy
0
 
Jeffrey Kane - TechSoEasyPrincipal ConsultantCommented:
The other option, by the way, would be to use a Power Line networking solution.  Please see http://www.asokausa.com/content/residential.html for one possible way to do this.

Jeff
TechSoEasy
0
 
entre-tcvAuthor Commented:
The powerline solution would be great IF my home office addition had the same fusebox but it doesn't. I have run into problems before with separate boxes and would hate to order the equipment in only to find that it wouldn't communicate.

If I have to run a line to that area I will probably choose to run a phone line instead of ethernet as it is more functional and less prone to loss over distance (100 meters).

Any other ideas out there?

Thanks
0
 
Jeffrey Kane - TechSoEasyPrincipal ConsultantCommented:
True, running a phone line might be better, but you still might want to use CAT-5 Cabling for that to keep the signal better insulated.

Jeff
TechSoEasy
0
 
entre-tcvAuthor Commented:
Good thought. Gues it's time to get my "fisher snake" out and get up in the walls and attic but that is not 'Tech done so easy' ;-(

Couldn't resist the irony.

Thanks all

500 Points to TechSoEasy
0
 
Jeffrey Kane - TechSoEasyPrincipal ConsultantCommented:
Well, unfortunately it's only "easy" when you get someone else to do it for you.  :-)

Jeff
TechSoEasy
0

Featured Post

Concerto's Cloud Advisory Services

Want to avoid the missteps to gaining all the benefits of the cloud? Learn more about the different assessment options from our Cloud Advisory team.

  • 5
  • 3
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now