GeneralMandible

For monitoring network load you can use Cacti: http://www.cacti.net/index.php What is the bandwidth of the connection between the two switches (just making sure it's gig or better)? Are you sure it's the network and not the DB or disk I/O issues? Are all clients experiencing this problem? Is it just certain times of the day (peak utilization times)? Any scheduled tasks running or hung during those times? Are the disks that the DB is on almost full? On a different note: You have a network with medical records and you've tied wireless to it...why? Do you have some form of IDS running?

The console connection uses a RJ45, but it is designed to connect to a serial port. By connecting it to your NIC, you're trying to talk to it with a different 'language'. If the router has an ethernet port with an IP and your NIC has an IP in the same broadcast domain, you should be able to telnet to it. A rollover cable and a crossover cable are different. A crossover generally goes from 568A to 568B ends. I believe rollover ends are pinned in reverse of each other. Of course Cisco's rollover is a DB9 on one end and a RJ45 on the other. The crossover cable is generally used for interconnecting network devices. Most newer equipment auto-senses, so you usually don't need them any more.

Here's your other post: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=133157 If you're just networking two computers with no shared internet connection, you can just use a crossover cable. If you insist on using the switch, connect the two computers via Cat5/5e/6 to ports on the switch. Don't connect them to the uplink one, since it is for connecting the switch to a router, broadband modem, another switch, etc. With either of these methods, you will probably need to put IP's on them manually since switches don't provide DHCP. Is this where you are needing help, setting up TCP/IP on the Windows boxes?

I think what your wanting to do is channel bonding/ethernet bonding/NIC Teaming. From what I've gathered, this is a function of the NIC drivers. Do your NIC's support teaming?

One thought is to install OpenSSH. This will provide you with encrypted command line access and also allow you to SFTP files. Are you wanting a separate GUI session into the system?

Also, if your LAN clients are NATted behind your server, and the server and the wirless are on the same broadcast domain, wireless clients will not be able to conatct LAN clients directly. LAN clients, however, should be able to contact wireless clients (if I am understanding your topography correctly).

Are the Router/WiFi and Server/LAN broadcast domains the same? If the WiFi is something like 192.168.1.1 with a netmask of 255.255.255.0. Then the LAN should be similar to 192.168.2.1 with a netmask of 255.255.255.0. Hope this helps.

Do like redxii said and get a router. If you connect a switch to your ISP with 3 PC's, you will get three IP addresses from your ISP. Most ISP's only allow one IP and will bill you for using more. The router will pull one IP and provide NAT, allowing you to connect as many PC's as you want (within reason). On a side note, switches and hubs are different. Think of a switch as a cloverleaf freeway interchange and a hub as a 4-way stop.

I wish and I would do so, but I don't have the MAC address - the IP address it's all I see... If you're using a Windows machine and are in the same broadcast domain, open a command prompt and type the following: ping 10.10.x.36 arp -a You should see the IP with the corresponding MAC address.

I thought you could manually set the IP's for ICS?

Have you disabled "Simple File Sharing:?

Here is a great whitepaper on IP addressing. http://www.3com.com/other/pdfs/infra/corpi...n_US/501302.pdf

You can send them at a faster interval ie 10 echo requests per second. The response is a different story.

Hping should be able to do that.

Allow Everyone Full Control in Share permission Add Everyone to NTFS security and restrict to read and execute Enable the Guest account Run gpedit.msc Enable "Network access: Let Everyone permissions apply to anonymous users" Disable "Network access: Restrict anonymous access to Named Pipes and Shares" Remember that your Windows 2003 machine is now less secure and might be open to hackers or malware.

I would try redoing the ends first. If that doesn't work, use the old cable to pull the new cable. This may work depending on if it's run through conduit and the number of turns.

UltraVNC and PCHelpware The encryption and versatility.

I'm currently using an NEC, which has been great. I'm not sure how they'll be down the road since they are owned by Sony, now. A co-worker highly recommends the Samsungs, cheap & quiet. Another co-worker had nothing but problems with his Pioneer. It was extremely loud. At one point, he sent it in for repair. It took Pioneer a couple of months to get it back to him. I tried Lite-On several years ago, and was not impressed. The burn speed kept getting slower and slower, until it wouldn't burn or read at all over an 8 month period. I contacted the e-tailer & they went out of business. So I went to directly to Lite-On and received no response whatsoever. Got a couple of good months out of it. Personally, I would say NEC or Samsung...best bang for the buck.

Seagates mostly. 5 yr warranty is nice and I've had decent experiences with them. I wouldn't hesitate to buy Maxtor either, especially now that Seagate owns them. I've owned Western Digitals (I love my Passport) als0, and can't complain. Seagate gets preference, though.

I am looking at getting one of these for work. Since our hardware guys are not certified to work on these, the quality and warranty come into play quite a bit. I really only need it to do telnet, SSH, email, web browsing, etc. The equipment I work on is spread out all over a university campus, so the size and weight are the attraction. Any thoughts you have on this are most appreciated.

Yep, Deletes temp files Disables pagefile Reboot Chkdsk Defrag Enable pagefile Reboot Cleanup when you login - this step only takes a couple of seconds

It only displays what it found before defragging. It is not a dynamic page. It does take a while depending on a lot of different factors. If you want a dynamic display from the command line, use DirMS. As far as the restart while it runs, try using this: start /wait defrag c: -f The "start /wait" tells windows to run the command, but wait for it to finish to run the next command. Hope this helps.

This is working on 2000 Pro & Server and 2003, now. I updated it a few months back.

Norton Software=Bloatware I used their Anti-virus for years without problems. That being said, I worked on a lot of machines that I had to remove it from. I even worked on a friends computer that I couldn't get a brand new copy of Norton installed. It kept saying to run from autorun.exe. POS! Eventually I installed AVG and told her to get her money back. Norton had a fair amount of false positives and the memory footprint was huge compared to others. I personally can't stand Norton Internet Security. Their firewall is atrocious and they bought out the best free personal firewall, Sygate. I did a review of BitDefender and NOD32 about a year ago, because these were the two favorites. http://www.pebcac.net/downloads/Documents/AV_Review.pdf It's a little dated but it's somewhat relevant.

I've updated the packages & I was able to accomplish all of these tasks. I finally sat down and looked at putting it into VB and it only took me about a week to get it "working." I still have some error handling to do, but it's working. I switched the defrag to DirMS due to MS's inability to defrag large files.