Direct Connect Error.?

I am trying to connect 2 windows xp computers to eathother with cat5 UTP. Thee is not hubs or anything. The cable is just pluged from one NIC to another. In windows the network connection for LAN says cable unplugged. I ran a wizzard for dircet connect and one of the computers is comming up with this error: "Incoming Connections depends on the Routing and Remote Access services which was unable to start. For more information, check the system event log. "

 

Connecting two computers directly without a hub or a router requires a crossover cable. Your other alternative option is to setup a direct cable connection as indicaticated in the following link. A regular network cable will not work.

http://www.wown.com/articles_tutorials/dccmain.html

 

so...

Can I buy a crossover cable and then plug it in then it will wouk fine? or do I also have to set up windows with a wizzard to get it working?

.:newbie:.

 

Yes, once you have the right cable type then it should work.

In spite of what the wizard tells you, it's never necessary to run it on any computer. You can do it manually as well. The default network settings in XP are compatible and should be able to network with each other without doing much of anything. If there is a firewall perhaps on any of the computers, you'll need to properly configure them to allow access on the network.

 

your smart!

Thankx, I do have cable internet and it has a cable from the computer to the external modem, is that a patch cable or a crossover cable? if its a crossover cable I could use it instead of buying a new crossover cable.

 

I don't think you have a crossover cable. You'll be better off in the long run to purchase a NAT router. It will make it easier for you and keep your network safe. Without a router you could do this:

1) Install two network cards in the host computer. With one network card directly attached to the cable modem. The other network card which requires a crossover cable to the other computer's network card.

2) Enable ICS on the host computer that is directly connected to the computer. You don't need to do this on any other computer. Just the main computer that is directly connected to the Internet. Details here.

Windows XP Internet Connection Sharing
http://www.practicallynetworked.com/sharing/xp_ics/

3) Enable the Windows Firewall on the host computer Internet Connection or use a third party firewall.

 

RoastedWafflesi

Sugestion.

Get yourself a 4 or 8 port Router. I suggest Linksys cause that is what I have and have had no problems. Just make sure DHCP is enabled.

Plug each machine into the Router and the Router into the Modem.

Then set each machine to auto optain address. ( which will be assigned by DHCP )

I believe it uses all Cat5 cable.

I have an XP Pro and 2 98SE machines setup this way and all works very well. And I can ( and have ) plug in any other machine this way and all seems to work very well.

However you do need to make sure each machine has an individual NAME.

I also have a Network Printer plugged into the Router.

With this type of setup no one machine has to depend on another for anything. PLus you can have them all online at the same time.

BillyBob

 

With my suggestion you can FORGET that nasty troublesome piece of MS trash.

With it if the HOST machine goes down EVERYBODY else goes with it as far as the INTERNET goes.

Sorry for the firmness folks. But I learned this from the BEST teacher of all. EXPERIENCE

BillyBob

 

Yes, BillyBob that's correct.

You don't need to enable ICS if you have a router. The router will do that for you and will assign a private ip address usually in the 192.168.x.x range.

 

ICS may be fine WHEN IT WORKS.

But the S in ICS stand for SHARING.

Sharing requires a Host.

If the Host goes out the ICS becomes ICSS.

Alias- Internet Connection Sharing STINKS.

I even though I have a Router I DID HAVE a couple of drives on this machine setup for SHARING. I thought I could trust the kids ( Nieces and Nephews ) but I thought wrong when I found one of them viewing files on my machine.

I only caught them when I shut this machine down and one of them hollered " HEY !! what happened to my program. "

Being smarter than I gave them credit for being they had found out they could run things from my machine. SO if they can do that, what esle can they do ?

Also with Sharing I believe it makes it makes it easier for a Virus etc. to get from machine to machine.

ecross may be more able to better answer that.

I know a LAN ( using a Router ) may be a bit more costly but in the end I believe Well Worth It

And at least for myself MUCH MORE reliable.

BillyBob

 

BillyBob, I think you are getting too peronoid my friend with file sharing.

It's your LAN, and it's your choice what you do. Not everyone is the same and there is so many ways of networking with Windows. The setup depends on the person.

I do agree on a few things. ICS does require a host. The main computer powered on whenever you wish to access the Internet from another computer. I have a router with my home network setup and I think it's the best solution. I also do file sharing on the nework as well.

I only shared the folders I wished to share and not shared every single folder nor I don't share the root of the C: drive and I don't recommended it. Sharing folders is what I recommend.

With Windows XP Pro that has a disk converted to NTFS you can take advantage of using share permissions for each user. In addition, I've never had a virus that had spread from machine to machine on the local area network. Is it possible? Yes, it's possible once you get infected and depending on the network setup. This is Symantec's solution for sharing.

Configuring shared Windows folders for maximum network protection
http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPOR...56818006f78bf&dtype=&prod=&ver=&osv=&osv_lvl=

If a malicious program or you get infected in the first place, you've already lost the battle. Layer your defenses. Don't let it get as far as attempting make an outgoing connection. Keep safe with a updated antivirus program and have a firewall properly configured.

 

ecross

I have to say that in our own ways ( or expression of same ) I think we do agree.

If SHARING is done PROPERLY then it can be used to an advantage. Having the Router does not stop me from sharing.

And I was just trying to bring out some areas where CAUTION should be used when sharing. And maybe even some of the drawbacks. And I believe I am trying to look at the long term overall reliability. And I believe certainly the addition of a new PC to the group.

In my case I was CARELESS. I thought I had only set a folder or two to be shared. But NO ! I did not pay attention and shared the WHOLE DRIVE. Not too smart of me.

But lets try a look at hardware. Printer mostly.

I had a Printer ( HP5550 ) set up on this machine and set to be shared. As long as this machine was on, on was well. Anybody could use it. But I had to upgrade the drivers to the ones for XP. Then the other ( 98SE ) machines had problems.

But also when I was working on this machine ( or had shut it down ) the kids could not use it to print out their research projects for their school work. So I added an HP 5850. Plugged it into the Router and BINGO ! All can use it at anytime. AFTER I installed the proper drivers on the 98 machines.

I am now ( or was untill the Heating system went bonkers ) looking into a Networkable Scanner. Then the others can have the used of both it and the Printer when my machine is down. But that has to be put on hold for now, we NEED heat. The scanner can wait.

My Wife and I have found that games play much better between the machines using the Router ( LAN ) than when shared.

So in the end I think what we have here is one of those " Personal Preference, How is the system used deals . "

In some cases both may work. In others one may be better. In mine I find the LAN with little or no sharing works the best for me.

Each has its own place. With me sharing has no place.

If you are sharing two machines with the same OS then things may not be too bad. But sharing two different OSs there can/may be problems.

Sharing one PC with two others is as bad as having one car and two or more teenage drivers. I have been there and all I can say it YUCK

Being asked to go shopping. A wedding coming up and I NEED Ink cartridges.

BillyBob

 

BillyBob, this is my thoughts on a network scanner. First off, Windows itself doesn't support this. It is probably possible by purchasing a scanner that supports this or purchasing additional software such as RemoteScan. Sharing a scanner over the network has been asked by several people and from what I gather is that they aren't inexpensive and are not toward the consumer market.

Personally, I don't see a point of sharing a scanner myself. If the scanner was attached to a networked computer, you'll still have to get up, walk over to the scanner, and put your items to be scanned. Are you still wanting a networkable scanner?

 

The more I think about it SENSIBLEY the more I have to agree. The one I have now is setting right here beside me. And has the XP drivers installed.

And that is also pretty much the response I got in a store today.

And cost VS need may well say " Naw !. Not till I win the Lottery. " Then I can but one on each machine which makes NO SENSE either.

And I would more than likely need two different versions of said software. Unless I was lucky enough to get a version that supported both XP Pro and 98SE.

HMMM !! Guess what. I was just looking at Printers from the Start Menu. Both the 5550 & the 5580 are available from all machines. Except the 5550 won't work from the other machines unless mine is on. It is USB and shared.

One thing nice about these two printer. They both use the same 56 & 57 cartridges. Which I FINALY REMEMBERED to pick a new set of today.

Have yourself a find day.

BillyBob