Is it possible to have ethernet and wireless simultaneously?

[CyberDude]

As the subject says. I want to have access to one network via ethernet and at the same time access a wireless router on a different network using the wireless radio. I'll be picking up different IP addresses from each network. I can't get it to work. It seems you can have one or the other but not both at the same time. I've looked in Access IBM and all I can find is the option to use the fast available connection or by priority.

Is there anyway of doing this?

[skanky]

just dont use access connections and have both enabled in windows networking.

i use a wired and wireless connection at the same time for different purposes (wired=faster lan access, wireless=internet) although both are on the same network but with different ips.

[CyberDude]

Thanks Skanky. Unfortunately, on advice received elsewhere on this forum I use access connections and have been told it is not adviseable to mix AC with windows networking.

At least you have confirmed it is possible. I'll wait and see if anyone else can offer advice before I start reconfiguring to use windows networking.

[lfeagan]

I have one that might work. Under the Adapter tab there is the option:
"disable this wireless radio when I switch to a different location profile"
or
"disconnect from this network when I swtich to a different location profile".
If you don't check that box, shouldn't it seem logical that it wouldn't then disconnect?
So, make two seperated profiles, then just enable one, then the other. They should both stay on. I tried it out and it seemed to work fine for me. Just make sure that you don't have that box checked in either profile. I connected to some random unsecured router in the building and my local wired network and then did a route print and saw the following:

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:\Documents and Settings\Lance Feagan>route print
===========================================================================
Interface List
0x1 ........................... MS TCP Loopback interface
0x2 ...00 05 4e 4c 05 af ...... 11a/b/g Wireless LAN Mini PCI Adapter - Packet
cheduler Miniport
0x3 ...00 0d 60 fe c8 4f ...... Intel(R) PRO/1000 MT Mobile Connection - Packet
Scheduler Miniport
===========================================================================
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.44.5.254 10.44.5.25 1
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.105 10
10.44.5.0 255.255.255.0 10.44.5.25 10.44.5.25 10
10.44.5.25 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 10
10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 10.44.5.25 10.44.5.25 10
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1
192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.105 192.168.1.105 10
192.168.1.105 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 10
192.168.1.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.105 192.168.1.105 10
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 10.44.5.25 10.44.5.25 10
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 192.168.1.105 192.168.1.105 10
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 10.44.5.25 10.44.5.25 1
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.105 192.168.1.105 1
Default Gateway: 10.44.5.254
===========================================================================
Persistent Routes:
None


So, looks like it worked just fine to me. I was able to ping hosts on both networks just fine.

[Leon]

skanky- when you do that, how does an application "know" which connection to use?

[lfeagan]

skanky- when you do that, how does an application "know" which connection to use?

You must setup your routes correctly by using the route add/delete commands, unless Windows does it correctly by itself. Note the gateway part visible in route print. That is the interface IP it will use to get the the nework specified by the ip/netmask preceding it on that line. If you study up on routing this should be pretty obvious how this all works.

[CyberDude]

I have one that might work. Under the Adapter tab there is the option:
"disable this wireless radio when I switch to a different location profile"
or
"disconnect from this network when I swtich to a different location profile".
If you don't check that box, shouldn't it seem logical that it wouldn't then disconnect?

Ifeagan, I did have the option unchecked but what I didn't have was a second profile. I'll set up a second profile and try enabling them both.

Thanks

[Leon]

lfeagan, i will study up on this.... didn't even know about that command... one question, is it possible with this for two different applications to use two different network connections from the same machine?

[MichaelMeier]

..

[lfeagan]

lfeagan, i will study up on this.... didn't even know about that command... one question, is it possible with this for two different applications to use two different network connections from the same machine?

For those wanting to learn more, How Stuff Works is always a nice place to get a high-level overview of things. For starters, if you don't know what a NAP or MAN is, read up on the internet infrastructure:
http://computer.howstuffworks.com/inter ... ucture.htm

Now prepared with that knowledge you should be able to read about how routers work:
http://computer.howstuffworks.com/router.htm

If you really want to learn more though, I suggest starting here:
http://www.tldp.org/LDP/nag/
This really is a lot less watered down that How Stuff Works is. If you know computery things already, this should appeal much moreso to you.

On a related side note, FMI about switching read this:
http://computer.howstuffworks.com/lan-switch.htm

Now, to address your inquiry.
The most positive answer I can give to this is "it depends". Let me see if I understand you correctly. You want to to have a single computer with two network addresses, lets call them 1 and 2, assigned to it. You then want to run applications A and B on it and have A use IP address 1 and B use IP address 2. Well, the real key here is that for you to forcibly make this happen one of two things would need to occur.
One--if 1 and 2 are on non-overlapping IP/netmask combinations, then this should happen automatically for you based on the routing table, assuming that the applications are connecting to IP addresses 3 and 4, where 3 is on only accessible by 1 and 4 is only accessible by 2. The routing table would then know that the only way to get to a given machine was through 1 for server 3 and through 2 for server 4.
Two--On the other hand, if the two IP addresses assigned are both on the same logical address space, ie they have overlap or are in the same netmask/ip range, then the applications themselves are going to somehow need to be informed that A is to use 1 and B is to use 2. Very few applications support this behaviour. There is really no way that I know of in Windows to explicitly tell the OS to use 1 for A and 2 for B. Generally the decision as to what interface to use is left up to the OS and I am not sure of a signalling method to explicitly tell it to use one or the other.

So, as usual, the answer is "it depends". But my guess is that the real answer is no, unless you meet all the caveats in one.

[Elhabash]

What about using the ethernet and wireless at the same time for the same thing? If I want to copy a file to another computer and use the wireless to increase bandwitdth a bit?

Normally, if I try to do this, the best I can achieve is that both connections are active, but only one of them (the wireless) is being used. It is not that important, because there is no big speed gain, but I am asking out of curiosity...

[lfeagan]

What about using the ethernet and wireless at the same time for the same thing? If I want to copy a file to another computer and use the wireless to increase bandwitdth a bit?

Normally, if I try to do this, the best I can achieve is that both connections are active, but only one of them (the wireless) is being used. It is not that important, because there is no big speed gain, but I am asking out of curiosity...

Basically, no. What you are referring to is generally called EtherChannel (the proprietary Cisco implementation, but licensed by many others). You are trying to bridge multiple physical links into one logical link. This requires special software, but can be done if the server and the client understand what needs to be done. A simple implementation might just use a round-robin scheme weighted by the bandwidth available on each connection to send packets through different interfaces.

[Leon]

Hey Lance, thanks for your great advice and pointing me in the right direction. You are a natural teacher! Thank you as well on behalf of all members (and lurkers) for your past, ongoing, and (hopefully) future contributions to this board. Btw, stop being lazy and get your T42 on the hardware list of your (wonderful) website!

Regards,

Leon

[Volker]

What about using the ethernet and wireless at the same time for the same thing? If I want to copy a file to another computer and use the wireless to increase bandwitdth a bit?

The builtin ethernet is gigabit ethernet, so it is 20 times faster than "G" wireless even if there is no interference at all. Assuming, of course, that your network hubs/server also do gigabit ethernet.

The speed of copying files is then limited by the harddisks, not network transfer rate.

[lfeagan]

Btw, stop being lazy and get your T42 on the hardware list of your (wonderful) website!

Regards,

Leon

Good point. I finally got around to updating that list. That was like a three year old listing. Extremely out of date. Here is something that should seem a lot more reasonable
http://www.vectorcomputing.net/about_computer.htm

It took me about 5 hours to update the list and put in all of the links. Total time suck, thus why I hadn't done it. Didn't have the proper impetus

BTW, if it doesn't have a T42p on the list, its b/c I am changing name servers and moving webhosting off of my personal boxes as we speak. It *should* work, as it has for me from a couple of different ISPs I tested with around the country.