|
Posted by ps56k on June 8, 2008, 7:25 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Harvey wrote:
>> On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 13:16:01 -0700, Harvey wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>> I have a Win 98 computer that I want to use on the road to dialup
>>> my Win XP Home computer that is connected to my LAN. The LAN is via
>>> a DSL modem router combo. When I dailup I am asked for the
>>> username, password and domain. For username and password, I use the
>>> same as I use to log ont Win XP. Is this correct?
>>> What do I use for domain?
>>> Where do I find the is domain name/number? When I do an ipconfig on
>>> the answering computer, I get: Connection-specific DNS Suffix :
>>> domain_not_set.invalid Is that okay? or can/should I set it? How?
>>> Once set, is that the domain I use to login from dialup?
>>
>> Note that this has nothing to do with ethernet. This is a Windows
>> question.
>>
>> That said, the "domain" you are looking for is the name of the XP
>> machine.
>>
>> M4
>
> This didn't work. what am I missing?
BTW - you keep asking the same types of technical questions
on how to connect to your camera box
and think it is as simple as plugging in an AC extension cord...
IT IS NOT -
If you continually ask questions, with no specific technical details,
how do you expect to get any kind of technical solution
for your technical challenge of connecting to your "camera monitoring
server" ?
Sure - we all learn as we go -
but this latest "dialup" question indicates your lack of understanding
of how computer communications really works
and different technical solutions that are available.
|
 
| |
Posted by ps56k on June 8, 2008, 7:40 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
weekly question updated -
Martijn Lievaart wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 13:16:01 -0700, Harvey wrote:
>
>> Hi.
>> I have a Win 98 computer that I want to use on the road to dialup my
>> Win XP Home computer that is connected to my LAN. The LAN is via a
>> DSL modem router combo. When I dailup I am asked for the username,
>> password and domain. For username and password, I use the same as I
>> use to log ont Win XP. Is this correct?
>> What do I use for domain?
>> Where do I find the is domain name/number? When I do an ipconfig on
>> the answering computer, I get: Connection-specific DNS Suffix :
>> domain_not_set.invalid Is that okay? or can/should I set it? How?
>> Once set, is that the domain I use to login from dialup?
>
> Note that this has nothing to do with ethernet. This is a Windows
> question.
>
> That said, the "domain" you are looking for is the name of the XP
> machine.
>
Is it possible to connect to a server (with a dotted quad address)
connected via Ethernet to a computer, by setting up that computer to
answer a dial-up call (via 56k modem) from a computer calling it. That
is dialing the computer directly, not through the Internet.
I understand that I can set up the "host" computer to answer an
incoming call, but how do I then get the connection to another server
through that connection?
Thanks so much for your help,
Harvey
|
|
Posted by ps56k on June 8, 2008, 9:18 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
this requires that your host computer be connected to the Internet, waiting,
and the client computer be any computer connected to the Internet with a
browser
https://www.gotomypc.com
Other versions of "Remote Access & Control" software will require the
software be installed
at both Host and Client to achieve the dial-out and auto-answer functions +
the desktop control.
Some versions may not work on Win98
WinXP has a "hosting" feature called Remote Desktop Connection,
but I believe that only the XP/pro version has it as a "host" function.
Across my test LAN, I can connect from my test Win98 desktop to my test
XP/pro laptop.
However, it relies on the computers already being connected via some TCP/IP
connection.
As you keep searching for some alternative to your "camera viewing"
challenge,
remember there are layers to the solution>
1 - the computers must be somehow physically connected (LAN, Internet,
dialup, etc)
2 - once connected, they must share a common software remote access
host/client technology
3 - that remote access technology must have the control or commands to allow
your solution to work.
4 - given all the enabled communications, your specific "application" must
be able to work
Since in all your postings, you've never really mentioned "how" you view
your cameras,
or why you say things are "slow" - then any solution is pretty much
arbitrary.
If you can't answer each series of "communication layer" questions
completely,
then the next layer has no chance of working...
|
|
Posted by Harvey on June 12, 2008, 9:20 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options > here's a couple of other technologies...
>
> this requires that your host computer be connected to the Internet, waiting,
> and the client computer be any computer connected to the Internet with a
> browserhttps://www.gotomypc.com
>
> Other versions of "Remote Access & Control" software will require the
> software be installed
> at both Host and Client to achieve the dial-out and auto-answer functions +
> the desktop control.
> Some versions may not work onWin98
>
> WinXP has a "hosting" feature called Remote Desktop Connection,
> but I believe that only the XP/pro version has it as a "host" function.
> Across my test LAN, I can connect from my testWin98desktop to my test
> XP/pro laptop.
> However, it relies on the computers already being connected via some TCP/IP
> connection.
>
> As you keep searching for some alternative to your "camera viewing"
> challenge,
> remember there are layers to the solution>
>
> 1 - the computers must be somehow physically connected (LAN, Internet,
> dialup, etc)
> 2 - once connected, they must share a common software remote access
> host/client technology
> 3 - that remote access technology must have the control or commands to allow
> your solution to work.
> 4 - given all the enabled communications, your specific "application" must
> be able to work
>
> Since in all your postings, you've never really mentioned "how" you view
> your cameras,
> or why you say things are "slow" - then any solution is pretty much
> arbitrary.
>
> If you can't answer each series of "communication layer" questions
> completely,
> then the next layer has no chance of working...
Well, yesterday I got it to work with no 3rd party SW using a direct
dial up connection from one WinXP computer to another. The camera
scanner box is connected to a LAN via a Linksys router. So my mission
is accomplished with no expensive HW, SW or phone connections.
I really do appreciate all the help from everyone on this group.
And sorry for my ideas bouncing around while I sorted out all the
possibilities.
Harvey
|
|
Posted by Harvey on June 12, 2008, 9:22 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options > here's a couple of other technologies...
>
> this requires that your host computer be connected to the Internet, waiting,
> and the client computer be any computer connected to the Internet with a
> browserhttps://www.gotomypc.com
>
> Other versions of "Remote Access & Control" software will require the
> software be installed
> at both Host and Client to achieve the dial-out and auto-answer functions +
> the desktop control.
> Some versions may not work on Win98
>
> WinXP has a "hosting" feature called Remote Desktop Connection,
> but I believe that only the XP/pro version has it as a "host" function.
> Across my test LAN, I can connect from my test Win98 desktop to my test
> XP/pro laptop.
> However, it relies on the computers already being connected via some TCP/IP
> connection.
>
> As you keep searching for some alternative to your "camera viewing"
> challenge,
> remember there are layers to the solution>
>
> 1 - the computers must be somehow physically connected (LAN, Internet,
> dialup, etc)
> 2 - once connected, they must share a common software remote access
> host/client technology
> 3 - that remote access technology must have the control or commands to allow
> your solution to work.
> 4 - given all the enabled communications, your specific "application" must
> be able to work
>
> Since in all your postings, you've never really mentioned "how" you view
> your cameras,
> or why you say things are "slow" - then any solution is pretty much
> arbitrary.
>
> If you can't answer each series of "communication layer" questions
> completely,
> then the next layer has no chance of working...
(2nd try at this post)
Well, yesterday I got it to work with no 3rd party SW using a direct
dial up connection from one WinXP computer to another. The camera
scanner box is connected to a LAN via a Linksys router. So my mission
is accomplished with no expensive HW, SW or phone connections.
I really do appreciate all the help from everyone on this group.
And sorry for my ideas bouncing around while I sorted out all the
possibilities.
Harvey
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Direct connect Gigabit/Fast Ethernet | March 14, 2006, 9:43 pm |
| Connect to ethernet LAN through dial-up direct to a computer on the LAN? | May 29, 2008, 3:39 pm |
| WakeONLAN did not work for direct cable connection ? (Nics were shutdown after a night of sleep ?) | February 9, 2008, 4:56 am |
| can not access my web server by my WAN IP by router RP614 | January 27, 2006, 12:23 am |
| MAC addresses in router vs Access Point | May 1, 2008, 5:19 am |
| Windows PC As IEEE 802.11 Access Point | June 25, 2008, 4:43 pm |
| Looking for NextGeneration Ethernet Access Products developers | August 3, 2005, 12:01 am |
| Secure telnet access - 3Com switch | August 9, 2005, 11:38 am |
| for lianne: delightful premium access - dugbu - (1/1) | March 31, 2007, 7:06 pm |
| Difference between bridge and wireless access point?? | October 9, 2007, 6:57 pm |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML site map