direct lan connection

[bigCrash]

Hey,
i found some time over christmas to work on my freenas "project".

Installing Freenas was no problem so far, but......
if i connect my freenas server to the router, everything is ok and i can access the webinterface through his ip (dhcp works).
My problem is, that i don't want to use the router, but a direct connection from lan-port to lan-port from the server to my computer.
I don't have any experience in network technology, but i'm no noob at all.
How do i have to configure my pc and the freenas server, so that i can access the webinterface via direct connection?
The ip of the computer is 164.192.xxx.xxx and the subnetmask is 255.255.0.0
I dont have any idea :D static ip, specific routes????? IDK :(

Merry Christmas from Germany and sorry for my bad English, but i think that the international forum is more populare.....and so faster for my :p
bigCrash

 

[Nindustries]

Hello there!

If you only want a direct connection, you can just connect the 2 machines using straight UTP cables.
And then just assign them a static IP address in the same subnet, e.g.: 192.168.0.1 & 192.168.0.2 with mask 255.255.255.252

Greetings

 

[bigCrash]

yeah.....so i set the mask on both machines 255.255.255.252......makes sense......i'll try:)

 

[bigCrash]

it doesnt work:(, but i'm sure its my fail;)

i did it like this:
1. pressed in the freenas server menu the "1", didn't reset the network config and configured ipv4
2. as an ip i set: 172.168.0.3 , as netmask: 255.255.255.252

Same in windows, i attached the config:

Edit: even ping doesnt work

 

[Michael Wulff Nielsen]

Use 192.168.0.? Not 172. Then use ping to verify the connection.

Netmask should be 255.255.255.0 since 192 is the range for a private class c network.

 

[bigCrash]

I used 172. because my computer is already in a network with 192.xx.xxx.xxx .......

EDIT: 192.168.0.1 works if i disconnect my other network........

EDIT2: Everything works :DDDD I just used 192.172.0.1 and 192.172.0.2 .... i dont understand Classful network but yeah it doesnt matter;)

Thanks a lot!

 

[bigCrash]

Next problem......cifs share......
Webinterface works, but windows doesn't find the freenas server. I'm pretty sure that windows cant't resolv the name, because theres no DNS. The internet doesn't give me an answer.....
NsLookup doesn't work either.
Help;)
bigCrash

 

[gpsguy]

You could add an entry to the hosts file located here: %systemroot%\system32\drivers\etc\ on your Windows machine.

If your looking to increase performance, by using a direct connection, consider using an Intel NIC, instead of the Realtek. An OEM Intel Pro/1000 CT costs about $30 USD.

If you don't have a gigabit router, you could buy a gigabit ethernet switch. Connect your pc and FreeNAS server to it. And, connect it to your router.

With your FreeNAS server configured to get to the internet (gateway and DNS entries), configure the email settings on your server. You will receive a daily message about your server's health. Should you have a problem, you can address it quickly.

 

[bigCrash]

Thanks......win-host file worked for me;)
I have a gigabit router, thats not the problem, but it is too far away, i'll think about the switch;)
Greetings
bigCrash, finally with a working FreeNAS

 

[titan_rw]

Keep in mind 192.172.*.* is not a private IP address range. That ip range may end up existing on the public internet. Not a good practice to use public ip's on a private network.

There's also no problem with using subnet masks other than the standard 'class c' (255.255.255.0 aka /24) on the 192.168.*.* private ip range. For example, the private ip range 10.*.*.* is technically a class A (/8) subnet, but very rarely is it used that way. It's normally split into smaller subnets (/24 or smaller).

I doubt your other network is using the entire 192.168.*.* range. It's probably using a mask of 255.255.255.0. So if it's using 192.168.1.0/24, then you can have a completely separate subnet on 192.168.2.0/24.

 

[jgreco]

Use 192.168.0.? Not 172. Then use ping to verify the connection.

Netmask should be 255.255.255.0 since 192 is the range for a private class c network.

Please do not perpetuate classful networking concepts. CIDR rendered classful concepts meaningless for Internet purposes, no matter how much the certification folks at Cisco kept trying to wish it back into relevance. It has been effectively dead, meaningless, and useless for about 20 years. It is perfectly fine to use whatever netmask is appropriate for a network regardless of first octet.