pcanywhere - subnet issue

[mav617]

Hi,

This is really bugging me and I bet it's simple! I have two locations, connected via a 2MB leased line with a Cisco 2600 at each end. Northern has an IP range of 192.168.200.xxx and Southern is 192.168.100.xxx. I can pcanywhere from any of the .200 machines to any of the .100 machines and I can pcanywhere from the .100 machines to the .200 machines, BUT I can't pcanywhere from a .200 machine to a .200 machine!

Where am I going wrong - do I need to bypass the routing table somehow onmy WAN (will it let me out and not back in??)

Many Thanks,

Mav617.

 

[chipk]

Traffic within the .200 and .100 networks should not hit the router, unless of course, something is misconfigured. Can you ping one .200 machine from another .200 machine?

Please post IPConfig output from one of your .200 machines, and from one of your .100 machines. I'm assuming the .100 machines CAN talk to one another via PCAnywhere?

 

[mav617]

Hi chipk,

If I do tracert or pathping from the .200 machine running the remote control service to the .200 host it doesn't hit the router - so why can't I PCAnywhere?

IPConfig is:

IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.200.4
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.200.***

The DG is the Cisco router on the Northern End of the network. The Southern (.100) machines can see each other over PCA, as can .100 - .200 and vice versa.


Roger K aka Mav617
'Never trust a badger with a screwdriver....'

 

[chipk]

If you can ping, I can't see why you would be able to pcanywhere from .100, but not .200, unless you've done something fancy with ACLs or firewalls on the clients to block PCA ports from certain locations.

If you have XP clients, and you have the firewall on, but you allow exceptions, you would be able to ping, but not connect on certain ports.

 

[mav617]

I can't suss it either, nothing special on firewalls, it's a private circuit with no outside access, just a LAN at each end. All the machines are Win 2K Professional or (wait for it...) NT4.0!!

Roger K aka Mav617
'Never trust a badger with a screwdriver....'

 

[chipk]

Can you suss a .200 computer from a .100 computer and vice versa?

 

[mav617]

Yes, I can PCA around no problem unless I'm going from a .200 to a .200. I can ping the host using DNS to resolve the host name to the IP address, but when I try and ping back to the remote control pc from the host using the remote control pc name rather than it's IP address I get 'Bad IP Address' - so it's not resolving that either. Shouldn't matter as PCA is looking for IP address but it's a wierd co-incidence.

Roger K aka Mav617
'Never trust a badger with a screwdriver....'

 

[chipk]

What's the remote control pc's IP?

 

[mav617]

It's using DHCP, been assigned as 192.168.200.4 and the host pc is 192.168.200.81

Odd that DNS doesn't seem to resolve the hostname on the NT4.0 machine - just checking settings.

Roger K aka Mav617
'Never trust a badger with a screwdriver....'

 

[chipk]

NT 4.0 isn't capable of Dynamic DNS, so if that's what you're using, no surprise there. If not, then that machine would have to have a static entry, which is never good to use with DHCP. However, machines on the same network segment don't need WINS or DNS to resolve their names - it should resolve via NetBIOS broadcast. Can you UNC to any of your machines on the .200 segment? You can use \\hostname or \\ipaddress.

I've never seen this behavior before, but suspect something is wrong with a subnet mask or something somewhere. If, for instance, the subnet mask on your router was 255.255.0.0 instead of 255.255.255.0, I could see similar behavior resulting.

 

[mav617]

I think I'll have to manage for now. When I do IPCONFIG from that host machine I am seeing a different IP address and when I try to do /RENEW or /RELEASE I get a message about DHCP and Bindings. I am replacing this machine with a Win2K machine shortly so I'll see if that resolves it.

Many thanks Chipk for your time and brainpower

Roger K aka Mav617
'Never trust a badger with a screwdriver....'

 

[chipk]

No problem. Sorry we weren't able to get that solved for you. You're probably looking in the right direction with replacing that NT machine.