ICS and Windows 2003 server

[kenb]

I have a small network (all w2k) with one pc sharing a dsl connection using ics. I recently replaced the OS on the connection sharing pc with Windows 2003 standard with ics enabled. All the pc's that were connected to the network when the upgrade was done continue to receive their IP's and share the internet connection from the server as before.

The problem that I am experiencing is that any new pc that is added to the network (workgroup) is not assigned an IP in the standard range (192.168.0.x) and is unable to connect to the internet or access resources locally. This was previously possible when the sharing pc was running ics on w2k.

I set up a dhcp server on the 2003 server which then allocated a local IP and any new pc is able to access the local network, but still not access the internet..

My questions are:

Why were all previously connected pc's able to function as before with no additional steps required?

What steps are required to enable newly added pc's to function as before?

Many thanks.

[SteveB]

I took absolutley ages to work this out. Basically ICS, sets up its own mini dhcp and dns server, these will be conflicting with your 2003 server. There are two options (unless I am totally wrong cuz 2003 may be ok with this, anyone feel free to correct me)

1. Use a third party product to do your connection sharing

2. Set up 2003 dns and dhcp to correctly route your traffic

3. Do like i did and shell out on a broadband/adsl router, origo do one via ebuyer for about £30

good luck

[kenb]

SteveB - Thank's for responding. Yes you are correct about ics setting up it's own dhcp and dns functions. My issue is that after upgrading to 2003 server, this functionality stopped working with any NEW pc that is brought into the workgroup. When the ics server was running w2k I was able to add a new pc to the workgroup and it immediately had all access functionality.

I suspect that this may have something to do with enhanced security under Win2003 but am unsure as to how to overcome this.

In any case I have finally decided to go with your 3rd option. I am interested to know the solution to this for future reference.