More Networking FAQ...

...From real users like yourself.

There is no such thing as a stupid question...

Well, okay, the only stupid questions are the ones that are already answered on these pages. ;-) But seriously, the following are some good questions I've been asked. Some questions have been paraphrased to protect the innocent...

Hardware-Related Questions:

Can 10Base-T and 100Base-T connections hook into the same hub? Is the cabling the same?

Nope, nada, no can do, no way!

Cabling is the same (physically, yes, you could hook them to the same hub), but the protocols are different. Unfortunately, 100baseT is all or nothing, meaning every device (computer, printer, Ethernet hubs, etc) must be speaking the 100baseT protocol. If not every device is in compliance, the entire network reverts to 10baseT.

This is the problem companies and institutions face when trying to upgrade to 100baseT; it's difficult at best (from a logistics viewpoint, not to mention cost, manpower, etc.) to convert every computer and node at once to 100baseT.

Which is better? 10baseT or 10base2?
(repeated from the main page)

Speed-wise, it doesn't make a bit of difference.

Installation-wise, they both have advantages and disadvantages. A 10base2 (the coax kind) can be a little simpler to install, since you are basically stringing the computers together like Christmas tree lights. You also don't need to buy a hub. However, if you have one bad connection or cable, the entire network goes down (just like those darn christmas lights!). Troubleshooting becomes a pain as you add more computers together, because the break can literally be at at any one connection. Coaxial wire is expensive by the foot; the price may be right for 2 or 4 computers, but can get expensive as you add many computers.

10baseT (the phone cable kind) is easier to work with. Most people prefer 10baseT. Cable is cheaper by the foot. Connectors are easier to make (if you're into making your own). One bad connection doesn't bring the entire network down (only that computer is affected), making it much easier to troubleshoot.

Price-wise, 10base2 is probably a little cheaper for a small network of just a few computers. But the stability and ease of troubleshooting 10baseT usually offsets that for most people. If you have a medium-sized network or larger, 10baseT is usually the right choice.

Is it possible to connect both a 10baseT and a 10base2 network together?
(repeated from the main page)

Yes! They both are, afterall, talking the same protocol. Just the wire is different. Many 10baseT Ethernet hubs will have a BNC connector that is used for that very purpose (notice: most smaller 5 port hubs do not). The intent, of course, is to connect several 10baseT hubs, but a string of 10base2-connected computers will work just fine as well.

Remember, the topology for the 10base2 does not change! You still need two terminators on the 10base2 wire. Just pretend the hub is a computer node on the wire.

On a small network, is the Host text file really necessary? There was another little web page I read about hooking together a Mac and a PC and it didn't mention the Host file. It was only the two computers. Does that make a difference?

If you want to do TCP, you need some way to tell the computer that there is another computer out there, and where it is. TCP is a "silent" protocal, where everything has to be assigned an address. It's not like Appletalk where it's plug and go. Sometimes in two computer situations you can get away with not having a hosts table, but you should anyway.

Can I set up a DNS for internal (private) network so I don't need to bother with 'Host' files on all the computers?

Yes! And it would make your life a lot easier in the long run.

Apple provides a free DNS server. Look at MacDNS Page and also search Apple's web site for more info. I believe AppleShare 5.0 also has DNS capabilities built-in.

If you're looking for DNS performance from a Mac, look at QuickDNS Pro Men And Mice, which offers UNIX comparible performance and features (load balancing, fault tolerance, etc) on a Mac (with Mac ease of use).

I've found great shareware/freeware for using Macs as Internet servers, but I can't find the documentation to do it for a private network

Should be the exact same set-up as outlined on my Networking pages, or use one of the DNS options above.

I want to demonstrate the benefits of setting up an TCP/IP network which would allow LAN based email systems and file sharing AND a smoother transition toward an eventual Internet connection.

I don't think there is an Internet task the Mac can't handle. You should be able to knock their socks off! I work in a graduate school at Northwestern University, in a mixed environment of UNIX, Mac, and PC. I own and use both a PowerMac and a Pentium PC. PC's are a pain in the neck.

Do I have to a Name server address for at least one computer on my network in order to serve for WWW, FTP and email, or can I simply identify the computers via IP addresses and use a subnet mask? I have already tried using Netpresenz and it didn't work the fist time around.

I don't quite understand the question... Answer to what I think you're asking: you need to assign an IP address to each computer you want to use the "internet" service, and you need to update the Hosts file on each computer (assuming you're not using an DNS server). Look on my TCP networking page for IP convensions. Yes, this will get tedious quickly on more than a handful of computers (hence the reason for DNS (Domain Name Service)).

Should I "spread the wealth" and designate one computer the WWW server, one the FTP server, and one the email server? Does is matter? The traffic will be minimal at first, so I don't suspect the demand will be too high.

I can't really answer that because it really depends on the load, and what the users expect. I have a server setup here to do WWW and FTP (using Quid Pro Quo and NetPresenz), and it's freakin' fast (go to techreport.ils.nwu.edu). But, bare in mind that MacOS is cooperative, not preemptive, multitasking, so it will have trouble handling several active internet programs simultainously as, say Windows NT (not 95) or a UNIX flavor.

Crossplatform Networking Questions:

Some friends and I are getting together over break and bringing our computers. We're going to network them and *game*. I have a PowerCenter Pro 240, the only MacOS machine. Everyone else is Win95. I haven't much experience in networking, but I have set up a localtalk at home with two computers and a printer. Can I use Localtalk to network the PC's and my Mac?

No. PC's don't know what Localtalk is (or even have a port to plug the Localtalk into). You'll have to invest in Ethernet. Once you have your Ethernet network up and running, I suggest going with MacIPX. Windows 95 has it built-in, it's an easy download away for Mac users, and more games support it.

Is it possible to create a private network, not connected to the Internet in any way (yet!), which would allow FTP, WWW and email services, all using one or more computers as the respective servers?

Of course! There are too many programs to even try to list for doing FTP and WWW on the Mac. For FTP, I would recommend $10 shareware Netpresenz 4.1 Stairways Software. Very good FTP, so-so WWW service. Apple has Personal Web Sharing included in System 8, which is also very decent. If you're looking for powerful, insanely fast, look at the freeware version of Quid Pro Quo 2.0 Social Engineering. It uses RAM caching and other advanced capabilities to make it hyper fast and stable. Its incredible! Then of course, there is always Webstar.

And of course, there's always mac-based Email servers Qualcomm, List servers, and just about anything else you can image.

Have you seen MacOrchard? Drew lists every available internet client and server program available for the Mac (focusing more on the shareware/freeware side, but also commercial)

Below are reprints of questions from the main Networking 101 page, recapped here to create a master FAQ list:

Okay, so I installed an Ethernet network. How do I get my AppleTalk-compatible printer on the network?

Buy one of the many available Ethernet-to-Localtalk bridges. They normally support one or two devices, and cost less then $150. We have several brands installed around the building where I work, and they all work great! No slowdowns, no hassles!

Gee, I just spent $150 on that Ethernet-to-Localtalk thingy you sold me on (see above question), and my ImageWriter/StyleWriter/LaserWriter-LS printer won't work!

You dummy! A ImageWriter/StyleWriter/LaserWriter-LS is not an AppleTalk printer, it's a serial printer!

Examples of Appletalk printers are Apple LaserWriters, HP LaserJets (Mac-compatible), and HP Deskwriters.

Can I share my modem over the network?

There are a couple different types of software-only solutions. Each fulfilling a slightly different need:

• PortShare by Stalker Software - Software that allows you to share virtually any serial device (modems, labelmakers, ImageWriters) over the network as if it was connected directly. Only one computer can use the device at a time. (a time-limited demo is available)
• SurfDoubler by Vicom Technology - a software package that allows two computers to share a modem simultainously for web surfing. (Before you ask; no, this would not work for gaming! Games generate too much traffic).

A hardware solution:

There are a couple competing hardware products that turns modems into network devices. These are viable solutions for medium and large sized networks, where putting a modem on every desk would be cost prohibative:

• Shiva LanRover/E
• QuickStream Pro by Sonic Systems

Can I play a network game over the modem (such as Kali) AND include computers on my local network in the game?

No.

A modem is a serial device, not a network device that can be shared. Games cannot be 'bridged' to include players from the modem and players from a local network. Even with special software for modem sharing (see above question), only one device can control it at a time.