I really do understand that issue and will deal with it once I have a
solution to the real problem. Which in this case is a crippling lack of
available bandwidth. IT is aware of it and has even switched thier own pipe
to another T1 so they can function but they won't do that for anyone else.
It's so bad that for our plant, windows update doesn't work properly because
it times out, email calls go out occaisionally asking everyone to conserve
usage whenever anyone is doing a presentation that requires bandwidth. It's
just silly and my boss want me to fix it.
Using DSL will be a cost effective solution and once I demonstrate a
viable solution (short of running fiber 20 miles to the noc) IT will come
around. I have the support of my Boss and his. I know this can be secured
better than they currently provide so I'm not too worried about that end.
I'm just looking for the best way to do it. Somthing that IT will appreciate
and understand, even if they didn't think of it themselves.

"Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9741E6F768964compguy666hotmailcom@207.46.2 48.16...
> Talk to your IT folks. In most orgs, and yours sounds like a large one,
> somebody installing a rogue device, ESPECIALLY a router to the internet,
> You could find yourself unemployed so fast you'll have no idea what hit
> you. Think about it, would you install a new door in your company's
> building?
>
> "Doug Sherman [MVP]" <dsherman@notampabayspamforme.rr.com> wrote in
> news:OE#NsNYEGHA.740@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl:
>
>> The way you configure static routes on a router, as distinguished from
>> a Windows computer, is product specific. As an example, a low end
>> router such as Linksys BEFSR11 claims to support 20 static routes and
>> the manual explains how to configure them;
>>
>> http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satel...%2FLayout&pack
>> edarg
>> s=c%3DL_Product_C2%26cid%3D1115416832017&pagename= Linksys%2FCommon%2FVi
>> sitor Wrapper
>>
>> The first thing you need to do is determine whether this is a
>> significant issue - how many subnets are on this network and how many
>> do you really need to access. Possibly you could use dynamic routing,
>> but this is probably not a good idea in this scenario.
>>
>> Doug Sherman
>> MCSE, MCSA, MCP+I, MVP
>>
>> <churchmouse@noemail.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:OPSOy9WEGHA.1584@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>> Thanks folks,
>>> You are correct in that I wouldn't have access to the lan router.
>>> It
>>> would probably be possible to get IT to make a config change but we
>>> would rather just do it ourselves. I imagine that they will have a
>>> fit once they find out anyway but something has to change. This might
>>> be the catalyst.
>>> I didn't consider the DHCP aspect, but we could static all the
>> machines
>>> we have easily enough. I prefer that anyway so I can sniff out
>>> problems without chasing mac addresses.
>>> I'm not familar with static routes. I have seen the entry for
>>> them but
>>> never had a need, can you give me a cliff notes version of how to use
>> them?
>>> We also use Exchange server and domain logons that woul dhave to
>>> be
>>> validated through the central server. How much does that complicate
>> things?
>>> Perhaps a proxy (ISA) is the answer for browsing?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
>>> news:%23YAs%23hVEGHA.1032@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>>> > "Doug Sherman [MVP]" <dsherman@notampabayspamforme.rr.com> wrote in
>>> > message
>>> > news:eDJF9OVEGHA.2040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>> >> 2. You could use simple routing: Connect a DSL router to a LAN
>>> >> port
>> on
>>> >> your existing network; give it a compatible non-conflicting IP;
>>> >> and configure your local machines to use this IP as a default
>>> >> gateway.
>>> > However,
>>> >> if the city LAN comprises multiple subnets which you need to
>>> >> reach, you
>>> > must
>>> >> configure static routes to all of them on the DSL router - routes
>>> >> would point to your old LAN gateway. If your DSL router did not
>>> >> support
>>> > multiple
>>> >> static routes, you could configure the routes on individual
>>> >> machines. Whether or not the static route issue is significant
>>> >> requires more information about the city LAN and your specific
>>> >> needs.
>>> >
>>> > Hi, guys...
>>> >
>>> > That is what I would suggest too,..except I would leave the
>>> > existing LAN router as the Default Gateway (requires no changes to
>>> > Hosts, DHCP
>> Scopes,
>>> > etc), then change the Default Gateway of the LAN Router to be the
>>> > DSL Device. If routing protocols are in use it will already know
>>> > about the other LAN segments and have routes to them,...if not then
>>> > give it the required static routes.
>>> >
>>> > This way only one device is ever touched (the existing LAN Router)
>>> > and
>> it
>>> > prevents the LAN's Routing System from becomming dependent on a DSL
>> Device
>>> > of which most are "home user" quality. Besides that, with
>>> > multi-segment LANS, I am always against making the "Internet
>>> > Sharing Device" (whatever that may be) from being the lynch-pin of
>>> > the LAN's Routing ability. I
>> like
>>> > to keep the LAN's routing abilty independent of anything associated
>>> > with the
>>> > Internet.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
>>> > www.wandtv.com
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------
>>> > Understanding the ISA 2004 Access Rule Processing
>>> > http://www.isaserver.org/articles/IS...cessRules.html
>>> >
>>> > Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Guidance
>>> > http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/t...dance/2004.asp
>>> > http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/t...dance/2000.asp
>>> >
>>> > Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Partners
>>> > http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/partners/default.asp
>>> >
>>> > Deployment Guidelines for ISA Server 2004 Enterprise Edition
>>> >
>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...loy/dgisaserve
>> r.msp x
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Have your boss take it up with management. From the perspective of IT,
NO, they will not appreciate. At best, work with them. Introducing a new
connection to the internet behind their back will only piss them off and
put your job in jeopardy. There are other issues that you are not aware
of withregards to bandwidth. One of wich is cost. DSL may be cheap, but
it's not reliable.. You can be assured that if given the budget, your IT
folks would be more than happy to increase bandwidth.

Deal with the issue BEFORE you implement a solution. I run a network, I
can assue you that if I ever found a rogue router, regardless of the
intentions, I'd have the person responsible fired.

<churchmouse@noemail.nospam> wrote in
news:OunWZSbEGHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:

> I really do understand that issue and will deal with it once I
> have a
> solution to the real problem. Which in this case is a crippling lack
> of available bandwidth. IT is aware of it and has even switched thier
> own pipe to another T1 so they can function but they won't do that for
> anyone else. It's so bad that for our plant, windows update doesn't
> work properly because it times out, email calls go out occaisionally
> asking everyone to conserve usage whenever anyone is doing a
> presentation that requires bandwidth. It's just silly and my boss want
> me to fix it.
> Using DSL will be a cost effective solution and once I demonstrate
> a
> viable solution (short of running fiber 20 miles to the noc) IT will
> come around. I have the support of my Boss and his. I know this can be
> secured better than they currently provide so I'm not too worried
> about that end. I'm just looking for the best way to do it. Somthing
> that IT will appreciate and understand, even if they didn't think of
> it themselves.
>
> "Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9741E6F768964compguy666hotmailcom@207.46.2 48.16...
>> Talk to your IT folks. In most orgs, and yours sounds like a large
>> one, somebody installing a rogue device, ESPECIALLY a router to the
>> internet, You could find yourself unemployed so fast you'll have no
>> idea what hit you. Think about it, would you install a new door in
>> your company's building?
>>
>> "Doug Sherman [MVP]" <dsherman@notampabayspamforme.rr.com> wrote in
>> news:OE#NsNYEGHA.740@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl:
>>
>>> The way you configure static routes on a router, as distinguished
>>> from a Windows computer, is product specific. As an example, a low
>>> end router such as Linksys BEFSR11 claims to support 20 static
>>> routes and the manual explains how to configure them;
>>>
>>> http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satel...US%2FLayout&pa
>>> ck edarg
>>> s=c%3DL_Product_C2%26cid%3D1115416832017&pagename= Linksys%2FCommon%2F
>>> Vi sitor Wrapper
>>>
>>> The first thing you need to do is determine whether this is a
>>> significant issue - how many subnets are on this network and how
>>> many do you really need to access. Possibly you could use dynamic
>>> routing, but this is probably not a good idea in this scenario.
>>>
>>> Doug Sherman
>>> MCSE, MCSA, MCP+I, MVP
>>>
>>> <churchmouse@noemail.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:OPSOy9WEGHA.1584@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>>> Thanks folks,
>>>> You are correct in that I wouldn't have access to the lan
>>>> router. It
>>>> would probably be possible to get IT to make a config change but we
>>>> would rather just do it ourselves. I imagine that they will have a
>>>> fit once they find out anyway but something has to change. This
>>>> might be the catalyst.
>>>> I didn't consider the DHCP aspect, but we could static all the
>>> machines
>>>> we have easily enough. I prefer that anyway so I can sniff out
>>>> problems without chasing mac addresses.
>>>> I'm not familar with static routes. I have seen the entry for
>>>> them but
>>>> never had a need, can you give me a cliff notes version of how to
>>>> use
>>> them?
>>>> We also use Exchange server and domain logons that woul dhave
>>>> to be
>>>> validated through the central server. How much does that complicate
>>> things?
>>>> Perhaps a proxy (ISA) is the answer for browsing?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
>>>> news:%23YAs%23hVEGHA.1032@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>>>> > "Doug Sherman [MVP]" <dsherman@notampabayspamforme.rr.com> wrote
>>>> > in message
>>>> > news:eDJF9OVEGHA.2040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>> >> 2. You could use simple routing: Connect a DSL router to a LAN
>>>> >> port
>>> on
>>>> >> your existing network; give it a compatible non-conflicting IP;
>>>> >> and configure your local machines to use this IP as a default
>>>> >> gateway.
>>>> > However,
>>>> >> if the city LAN comprises multiple subnets which you need to
>>>> >> reach, you
>>>> > must
>>>> >> configure static routes to all of them on the DSL router -
>>>> >> routes would point to your old LAN gateway. If your DSL router
>>>> >> did not support
>>>> > multiple
>>>> >> static routes, you could configure the routes on individual
>>>> >> machines. Whether or not the static route issue is significant
>>>> >> requires more information about the city LAN and your specific
>>>> >> needs.
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi, guys...
>>>> >
>>>> > That is what I would suggest too,..except I would leave the
>>>> > existing LAN router as the Default Gateway (requires no changes
>>>> > to Hosts, DHCP
>>> Scopes,
>>>> > etc), then change the Default Gateway of the LAN Router to be the
>>>> > DSL Device. If routing protocols are in use it will already know
>>>> > about the other LAN segments and have routes to them,...if not
>>>> > then give it the required static routes.
>>>> >
>>>> > This way only one device is ever touched (the existing LAN
>>>> > Router) and
>>> it
>>>> > prevents the LAN's Routing System from becomming dependent on a
>>>> > DSL
>>> Device
>>>> > of which most are "home user" quality. Besides that, with
>>>> > multi-segment LANS, I am always against making the "Internet
>>>> > Sharing Device" (whatever that may be) from being the lynch-pin
>>>> > of the LAN's Routing ability. I
>>> like
>>>> > to keep the LAN's routing abilty independent of anything
>>>> > associated with the
>>>> > Internet.
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
>>>> > www.wandtv.com
>>>> > -----------------------------------------------------
>>>> > Understanding the ISA 2004 Access Rule Processing
>>>> > http://www.isaserver.org/articles/IS...cessRules.html
>>>> >
>>>> > Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Guidance
>>>> > http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/t...dance/2004.asp
>>>> > http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/t...dance/2000.asp
>>>> >
>>>> > Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Partners
>>>> > http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/partners/default.asp
>>>> >
>>>> > Deployment Guidelines for ISA Server 2004 Enterprise Edition
>>>> >
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...eploy/dgisaser
>>> ve r.msp x
>>>> > -----------------------------------------------------
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

Have your boss take it up with management. From the perspective of IT,
NO, they will not appreciate. At best, work with them. Introducing a new
connection to the internet behind their back will only piss them off and
put your job in jeopardy. There are other issues that you are not aware
of withregards to bandwidth. One of wich is cost. DSL may be cheap, but
it's not reliable.. You can be assured that if given the budget, your IT
folks would be more than happy to increase bandwidth.

Deal with the issue BEFORE you implement a solution. I run a network, I
can assue you that if I ever found a rogue router, regardless of the
intentions, I'd have the person responsible fired.

<churchmouse@noemail.nospam> wrote in
news:OunWZSbEGHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:

> I really do understand that issue and will deal with it once I
> have a
> solution to the real problem. Which in this case is a crippling lack
> of available bandwidth. IT is aware of it and has even switched thier
> own pipe to another T1 so they can function but they won't do that for
> anyone else. It's so bad that for our plant, windows update doesn't
> work properly because it times out, email calls go out occaisionally
> asking everyone to conserve usage whenever anyone is doing a
> presentation that requires bandwidth. It's just silly and my boss want
> me to fix it.
> Using DSL will be a cost effective solution and once I demonstrate
> a
> viable solution (short of running fiber 20 miles to the noc) IT will
> come around. I have the support of my Boss and his. I know this can be
> secured better than they currently provide so I'm not too worried
> about that end. I'm just looking for the best way to do it. Somthing
> that IT will appreciate and understand, even if they didn't think of
> it themselves.
>
> "Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9741E6F768964compguy666hotmailcom@207.46.2 48.16...
>> Talk to your IT folks. In most orgs, and yours sounds like a large
>> one, somebody installing a rogue device, ESPECIALLY a router to the
>> internet, You could find yourself unemployed so fast you'll have no
>> idea what hit you. Think about it, would you install a new door in
>> your company's building?
>>
>> "Doug Sherman [MVP]" <dsherman@notampabayspamforme.rr.com> wrote in
>> news:OE#NsNYEGHA.740@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl:
>>
>>> The way you configure static routes on a router, as distinguished
>>> from a Windows computer, is product specific. As an example, a low
>>> end router such as Linksys BEFSR11 claims to support 20 static
>>> routes and the manual explains how to configure them;
>>>
>>> http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satel...US%2FLayout&pa
>>> ck edarg
>>> s=c%3DL_Product_C2%26cid%3D1115416832017&pagename= Linksys%2FCommon%2F
>>> Vi sitor Wrapper
>>>
>>> The first thing you need to do is determine whether this is a
>>> significant issue - how many subnets are on this network and how
>>> many do you really need to access. Possibly you could use dynamic
>>> routing, but this is probably not a good idea in this scenario.
>>>
>>> Doug Sherman
>>> MCSE, MCSA, MCP+I, MVP
>>>
>>> <churchmouse@noemail.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:OPSOy9WEGHA.1584@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>>> Thanks folks,
>>>> You are correct in that I wouldn't have access to the lan
>>>> router. It
>>>> would probably be possible to get IT to make a config change but we
>>>> would rather just do it ourselves. I imagine that they will have a
>>>> fit once they find out anyway but something has to change. This
>>>> might be the catalyst.
>>>> I didn't consider the DHCP aspect, but we could static all the
>>> machines
>>>> we have easily enough. I prefer that anyway so I can sniff out
>>>> problems without chasing mac addresses.
>>>> I'm not familar with static routes. I have seen the entry for
>>>> them but
>>>> never had a need, can you give me a cliff notes version of how to
>>>> use
>>> them?
>>>> We also use Exchange server and domain logons that woul dhave
>>>> to be
>>>> validated through the central server. How much does that complicate
>>> things?
>>>> Perhaps a proxy (ISA) is the answer for browsing?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
>>>> news:%23YAs%23hVEGHA.1032@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>>>> > "Doug Sherman [MVP]" <dsherman@notampabayspamforme.rr.com> wrote
>>>> > in message
>>>> > news:eDJF9OVEGHA.2040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>> >> 2. You could use simple routing: Connect a DSL router to a LAN
>>>> >> port
>>> on
>>>> >> your existing network; give it a compatible non-conflicting IP;
>>>> >> and configure your local machines to use this IP as a default
>>>> >> gateway.
>>>> > However,
>>>> >> if the city LAN comprises multiple subnets which you need to
>>>> >> reach, you
>>>> > must
>>>> >> configure static routes to all of them on the DSL router -
>>>> >> routes would point to your old LAN gateway. If your DSL router
>>>> >> did not support
>>>> > multiple
>>>> >> static routes, you could configure the routes on individual
>>>> >> machines. Whether or not the static route issue is significant
>>>> >> requires more information about the city LAN and your specific
>>>> >> needs.
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi, guys...
>>>> >
>>>> > That is what I would suggest too,..except I would leave the
>>>> > existing LAN router as the Default Gateway (requires no changes
>>>> > to Hosts, DHCP
>>> Scopes,
>>>> > etc), then change the Default Gateway of the LAN Router to be the
>>>> > DSL Device. If routing protocols are in use it will already know
>>>> > about the other LAN segments and have routes to them,...if not
>>>> > then give it the required static routes.
>>>> >
>>>> > This way only one device is ever touched (the existing LAN
>>>> > Router) and
>>> it
>>>> > prevents the LAN's Routing System from becomming dependent on a
>>>> > DSL
>>> Device
>>>> > of which most are "home user" quality. Besides that, with
>>>> > multi-segment LANS, I am always against making the "Internet
>>>> > Sharing Device" (whatever that may be) from being the lynch-pin
>>>> > of the LAN's Routing ability. I
>>> like
>>>> > to keep the LAN's routing abilty independent of anything
>>>> > associated with the
>>>> > Internet.
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
>>>> > www.wandtv.com
>>>> > -----------------------------------------------------
>>>> > Understanding the ISA 2004 Access Rule Processing
>>>> > http://www.isaserver.org/articles/IS...cessRules.html
>>>> >
>>>> > Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Guidance
>>>> > http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/t...dance/2004.asp
>>>> > http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/t...dance/2000.asp
>>>> >
>>>> > Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Partners
>>>> > http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/partners/default.asp
>>>> >
>>>> > Deployment Guidelines for ISA Server 2004 Enterprise Edition
>>>> >
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...eploy/dgisaser
>>> ve r.msp x
>>>> > -----------------------------------------------------
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

"Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns974256DECD534compguy666hotmailcom@207.46.2 48.16...
> Perhaps a proxy (ISA) is the answer for browsing?

Maybe.

Since clients do not "find" the ISA via the LAN's Routing Scheme, you can
add an ISA to your new Internet Link and have the users use it for the
Internet access and it will not effect the LAN's Routing Scheme at all as
long as you *never* try to use SecureNAT Clients with the ISA. Use only Web
Proxy Clients or Firewall Clients (aka Winsock Clients).

Since Web Proxy Clients use the browser's "proxy settings" to find the ISA
and Firewall Clients use the locally installed "Firewall Client Software" to
find the ISA,...you can therefore use the ISA and never effect or alter the
existing Routing Scheme of the LAN.

This is how I run my system here and have about 3+ ways out to the Internet
with ISA being only one of them. I of course cannot use SecureNAT Clients
with my ISA,...because NAT depends on, and runs on top of, Layer3 Routing,
therefore any clients configured this way would be taken out via a different
Firewall Box because that is the box (not the ISA) that sits within the
"Layer3 Path" of the LAN.

--
Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com
-----------------------------------------------------
Understanding the ISA 2004 Access Rule Processing
http://www.isaserver.org/articles/IS...cessRules.html

Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Guidance
http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/t...dance/2004.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/t...dance/2000.asp

Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Partners
http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/partners/default.asp

Deployment Guidelines for ISA Server 2004 Enterprise Edition
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...isaserver.mspx
-----------------------------------------------------

When I come up with a solution that works, I will do exactly that.


"Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns974256DECD534compguy666hotmailcom@207.46.2 48.16...
> Have your boss take it up with management. From the perspective of IT,
> NO, they will not appreciate. At best, work with them. Introducing a new
> connection to the internet behind their back will only piss them off and
> put your job in jeopardy. There are other issues that you are not aware
> of withregards to bandwidth. One of wich is cost. DSL may be cheap, but
> it's not reliable.. You can be assured that if given the budget, your IT
> folks would be more than happy to increase bandwidth.
>
> Deal with the issue BEFORE you implement a solution. I run a network, I
> can assue you that if I ever found a rogue router, regardless of the
> intentions, I'd have the person responsible fired.
>
> <churchmouse@noemail.nospam> wrote in
> news:OunWZSbEGHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>
>> I really do understand that issue and will deal with it once I
>> have a
>> solution to the real problem. Which in this case is a crippling lack
>> of available bandwidth. IT is aware of it and has even switched thier
>> own pipe to another T1 so they can function but they won't do that for
>> anyone else. It's so bad that for our plant, windows update doesn't
>> work properly because it times out, email calls go out occaisionally
>> asking everyone to conserve usage whenever anyone is doing a
>> presentation that requires bandwidth. It's just silly and my boss want
>> me to fix it.
>> Using DSL will be a cost effective solution and once I demonstrate
>> a
>> viable solution (short of running fiber 20 miles to the noc) IT will
>> come around. I have the support of my Boss and his. I know this can be
>> secured better than they currently provide so I'm not too worried
>> about that end. I'm just looking for the best way to do it. Somthing
>> that IT will appreciate and understand, even if they didn't think of
>> it themselves.
>>
>> "Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9741E6F768964compguy666hotmailcom@207.46.2 48.16...
>>> Talk to your IT folks. In most orgs, and yours sounds like a large
>>> one, somebody installing a rogue device, ESPECIALLY a router to the
>>> internet, You could find yourself unemployed so fast you'll have no
>>> idea what hit you. Think about it, would you install a new door in
>>> your company's building?
>>>
>>> "Doug Sherman [MVP]" <dsherman@notampabayspamforme.rr.com> wrote in
>>> news:OE#NsNYEGHA.740@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl:
>>>
>>>> The way you configure static routes on a router, as distinguished
>>>> from a Windows computer, is product specific. As an example, a low
>>>> end router such as Linksys BEFSR11 claims to support 20 static
>>>> routes and the manual explains how to configure them;
>>>>
>>>> http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satel...US%2FLayout&pa
>>>> ck edarg
>>>> s=c%3DL_Product_C2%26cid%3D1115416832017&pagename= Linksys%2FCommon%2F
>>>> Vi sitor Wrapper
>>>>
>>>> The first thing you need to do is determine whether this is a
>>>> significant issue - how many subnets are on this network and how
>>>> many do you really need to access. Possibly you could use dynamic
>>>> routing, but this is probably not a good idea in this scenario.
>>>>
>>>> Doug Sherman
>>>> MCSE, MCSA, MCP+I, MVP
>>>>
>>>> <churchmouse@noemail.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:OPSOy9WEGHA.1584@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Thanks folks,
>>>>> You are correct in that I wouldn't have access to the lan
>>>>> router. It
>>>>> would probably be possible to get IT to make a config change but we
>>>>> would rather just do it ourselves. I imagine that they will have a
>>>>> fit once they find out anyway but something has to change. This
>>>>> might be the catalyst.
>>>>> I didn't consider the DHCP aspect, but we could static all the
>>>> machines
>>>>> we have easily enough. I prefer that anyway so I can sniff out
>>>>> problems without chasing mac addresses.
>>>>> I'm not familar with static routes. I have seen the entry for
>>>>> them but
>>>>> never had a need, can you give me a cliff notes version of how to
>>>>> use
>>>> them?
>>>>> We also use Exchange server and domain logons that woul dhave
>>>>> to be
>>>>> validated through the central server. How much does that complicate
>>>> things?
>>>>> Perhaps a proxy (ISA) is the answer for browsing?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
>>>>> news:%23YAs%23hVEGHA.1032@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>>>>> > "Doug Sherman [MVP]" <dsherman@notampabayspamforme.rr.com> wrote
>>>>> > in message
>>>>> > news:eDJF9OVEGHA.2040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>>> >> 2. You could use simple routing: Connect a DSL router to a LAN
>>>>> >> port
>>>> on
>>>>> >> your existing network; give it a compatible non-conflicting IP;
>>>>> >> and configure your local machines to use this IP as a default
>>>>> >> gateway.
>>>>> > However,
>>>>> >> if the city LAN comprises multiple subnets which you need to
>>>>> >> reach, you
>>>>> > must
>>>>> >> configure static routes to all of them on the DSL router -
>>>>> >> routes would point to your old LAN gateway. If your DSL router
>>>>> >> did not support
>>>>> > multiple
>>>>> >> static routes, you could configure the routes on individual
>>>>> >> machines. Whether or not the static route issue is significant
>>>>> >> requires more information about the city LAN and your specific
>>>>> >> needs.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Hi, guys...
>>>>> >
>>>>> > That is what I would suggest too,..except I would leave the
>>>>> > existing LAN router as the Default Gateway (requires no changes
>>>>> > to Hosts, DHCP
>>>> Scopes,
>>>>> > etc), then change the Default Gateway of the LAN Router to be the
>>>>> > DSL Device. If routing protocols are in use it will already know
>>>>> > about the other LAN segments and have routes to them,...if not
>>>>> > then give it the required static routes.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > This way only one device is ever touched (the existing LAN
>>>>> > Router) and
>>>> it
>>>>> > prevents the LAN's Routing System from becomming dependent on a
>>>>> > DSL
>>>> Device
>>>>> > of which most are "home user" quality. Besides that, with
>>>>> > multi-segment LANS, I am always against making the "Internet
>>>>> > Sharing Device" (whatever that may be) from being the lynch-pin
>>>>> > of the LAN's Routing ability. I
>>>> like
>>>>> > to keep the LAN's routing abilty independent of anything
>>>>> > associated with the
>>>>> > Internet.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
>>>>> > www.wandtv.com
>>>>> > -----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> > Understanding the ISA 2004 Access Rule Processing
>>>>> > http://www.isaserver.org/articles/IS...cessRules.html
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Guidance
>>>>> > http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/t...dance/2004.asp
>>>>> > http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/t...dance/2000.asp
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Partners
>>>>> > http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/partners/default.asp
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Deployment Guidelines for ISA Server 2004 Enterprise Edition
>>>>> >
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...eploy/dgisaser
>>>> ve r.msp x
>>>>> > -----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>