How to configure Windows 2003 as a Router ?

The following how to is for remote access, but it is the same idea.

How to setup vpn on 2003 as routerHow to setup VPN and NAT on Windows Server 2003 as a router. Pre-requirement:. 1. Two network interface cards. 2. One static public IP on the outside NIC. ...
http://www.howtonetworking.com/VPN/2003vpn1.htm


Bob Lin, MS-MVP, MCSE & CNE
Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Troubleshooting on http://www.ChicagoTech.net
How to Setup Windows, Network, VPN & Remote Access on http://www.HowToNetworking.com
"Peter" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
I am new to networking and would like to seek your advice.

We would like to configure a Windows 2003 Server as a router between 2
subnets.

There are already 2 NICs and each of them is assigned IP address of
different subnets.

We would like to know is it necessary for us to install any service (like
RRAS) to achieve our need ? Besides, does it mean that the default gateway
for those workstations connected to that Windows 2003 Server will use its IP
address as default gateway ?

Thank you for your help.

Peter

I am new to networking and would like to seek your advice.

We would like to configure a Windows 2003 Server as a router between 2
subnets.

There are already 2 NICs and each of them is assigned IP address of
different subnets.

We would like to know is it necessary for us to install any service (like
RRAS) to achieve our need ? Besides, does it mean that the default gateway
for those workstations connected to that Windows 2003 Server will use its IP
address as default gateway ?

Thank you for your help.

Peter

You'll need to configure RRAS. Simply select it from the Admin Tools menu
and use the help to get it working.

Assuming a simple network with the only way out of the network being via the
WS03 box, then you will need to set the default gateway for the workstations
to be the network interface of the server. Keep in mind that devices on the
other side of the server that is acting as the router need to have a static
route for the workstation subnet that goes back through the WS03 RRAS server
in order for return traffic to come back to the workstation.

I hope this is clear.

Cheers,
Jeremy.

"Peter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I am new to networking and would like to seek your advice.
>
> We would like to configure a Windows 2003 Server as a router between 2
> subnets.
>
> There are already 2 NICs and each of them is assigned IP address of
> different subnets.
>
> We would like to know is it necessary for us to install any service (like
> RRAS) to achieve our need ? Besides, does it mean that the default
> gateway for those workstations connected to that Windows 2003 Server will
> use its IP address as default gateway ?
>
> Thank you for your help.
>
> Peter
>
>

It is possible to allow IP routing without using RRAS, but it is pretty
pointless. Simply configure RRAS to be a LAN router from the wizard and it
will do it for you.

As Jeremy pointed out, all this does is configure the machine so that it
can forward traffic from one subnet to the other. Whether it routes or not
depends on how the two subnets are configured.

If all you want to do is link these two subnets, the routing is trivial.
You simply make the RRAS router the default gateway for both subnets. eg

192.168.1.x dg 192.168.1.1
|
192.168.1.1 dg blank
RRAS
192.168.2.1 dg blank
|
192.168.2.x dg 192.168.2.1

Any traffic which is not local (ie not in the same IP subnet) is sent to
the router. The router can deliver it in the other subnet because it has an
interface in that subnet (ie the target machine is local to the router).

Usually the setup is not as simple as that. One subnet is usually using
some other router, such as an ADSL Internet device as its default gateway.
Simply enabling IP routing doesn't do much because the trafffic never gets
to the RRAS router. You need extra routing to get the traffic to the correct
router. If you are in that situation and can't see what extra routing you
need, post a description of how your network is set up.

PS. I hope this server is not a DC. Using a DC as a router is not recomended
and it may cause you all sorts of odd problems.

Dear Robert,

Thank you for your advice.

When setting up the RRAS, I would like to know which option should I choose ?
1) VPN access and NAT
2) Secure connection between 2 private networks

Regards,
Peter
"Robert L [MVP - Networking]" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
The following how to is for remote access, but it is the same idea.

How to setup vpn on 2003 as router How to setup VPN and NAT on Windows Server 2003 as a router. Pre-requirement:. 1. Two network interface cards. 2. One static public IP on the outside NIC. ...
http://www.howtonetworking.com/VPN/2003vpn1.htm


Bob Lin, MS-MVP, MCSE & CNE
Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Troubleshooting on http://www.ChicagoTech.net
How to Setup Windows, Network, VPN & Remote Access on http://www.HowToNetworking.com
"Peter" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
I am new to networking and would like to seek your advice.

We would like to configure a Windows 2003 Server as a router between 2
subnets.

There are already 2 NICs and each of them is assigned IP address of
different subnets.

We would like to know is it necessary for us to install any service (like
RRAS) to achieve our need ? Besides, does it mean that the default gateway
for those workstations connected to that Windows 2003 Server will use its IP
address as default gateway ?

Thank you for your help.

Peter

Dear Bill,

Thank you for your advice.

The reason why we consider this option is because our Network Officer says
that by using a Windows 2003 Server as a router for connecting machines in
headquarter to a remote site.

I just wonder whether it is a good idea as the single point of failure will
be the Windows 2003 Server and the 2 NIC.

Regards,
Peter


"Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> It is possible to allow IP routing without using RRAS, but it is pretty
> pointless. Simply configure RRAS to be a LAN router from the wizard and it
> will do it for you.
>
> As Jeremy pointed out, all this does is configure the machine so that
> it can forward traffic from one subnet to the other. Whether it routes or
> not depends on how the two subnets are configured.
>
> If all you want to do is link these two subnets, the routing is
> trivial. You simply make the RRAS router the default gateway for both
> subnets. eg
>
> 192.168.1.x dg 192.168.1.1
> |
> 192.168.1.1 dg blank
> RRAS
> 192.168.2.1 dg blank
> |
> 192.168.2.x dg 192.168.2.1
>
> Any traffic which is not local (ie not in the same IP subnet) is sent
> to the router. The router can deliver it in the other subnet because it
> has an interface in that subnet (ie the target machine is local to the
> router).
>
> Usually the setup is not as simple as that. One subnet is usually using
> some other router, such as an ADSL Internet device as its default gateway.
> Simply enabling IP routing doesn't do much because the trafffic never gets
> to the RRAS router. You need extra routing to get the traffic to the
> correct router. If you are in that situation and can't see what extra
> routing you need, post a description of how your network is set up.
>
> PS. I hope this server is not a DC. Using a DC as a router is not
> recomended and it may cause you all sorts of odd problems.
>

Whatever device you use as a router, it is going to be a single point of
failure unless you have a very complicated routing setup with multiple
paths.

How are you planning to connect HQ to a remote site? Leased lines or
VPN?

"Peter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dear Bill,
>
> Thank you for your advice.
>
> The reason why we consider this option is because our Network Officer says
> that by using a Windows 2003 Server as a router for connecting machines in
> headquarter to a remote site.
>
> I just wonder whether it is a good idea as the single point of failure
> will be the Windows 2003 Server and the 2 NIC.
>
> Regards,
> Peter
>
>
> "Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> It is possible to allow IP routing without using RRAS, but it is pretty
>> pointless. Simply configure RRAS to be a LAN router from the wizard and
>> it will do it for you.
>>
>> As Jeremy pointed out, all this does is configure the machine so that
>> it can forward traffic from one subnet to the other. Whether it routes or
>> not depends on how the two subnets are configured.
>>
>> If all you want to do is link these two subnets, the routing is
>> trivial. You simply make the RRAS router the default gateway for both
>> subnets. eg
>>
>> 192.168.1.x dg 192.168.1.1
>> |
>> 192.168.1.1 dg blank
>> RRAS
>> 192.168.2.1 dg blank
>> |
>> 192.168.2.x dg 192.168.2.1
>>
>> Any traffic which is not local (ie not in the same IP subnet) is sent
>> to the router. The router can deliver it in the other subnet because it
>> has an interface in that subnet (ie the target machine is local to the
>> router).
>>
>> Usually the setup is not as simple as that. One subnet is usually
>> using some other router, such as an ADSL Internet device as its default
>> gateway. Simply enabling IP routing doesn't do much because the trafffic
>> never gets to the RRAS router. You need extra routing to get the traffic
>> to the correct router. If you are in that situation and can't see what
>> extra routing you need, post a description of how your network is set up.
>>
>> PS. I hope this server is not a DC. Using a DC as a router is not
>> recomended and it may cause you all sorts of odd problems.
>>
>
>

It is planned to use leased line.

Peter

"Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message
news:%23PWjvK%[email protected]...
> Whatever device you use as a router, it is going to be a single point of
> failure unless you have a very complicated routing setup with multiple
> paths.
>
> How are you planning to connect HQ to a remote site? Leased lines or
> VPN?
>
> "Peter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Dear Bill,
>>
>> Thank you for your advice.
>>
>> The reason why we consider this option is because our Network Officer
>> says that by using a Windows 2003 Server as a router for connecting
>> machines in headquarter to a remote site.
>>
>> I just wonder whether it is a good idea as the single point of failure
>> will be the Windows 2003 Server and the 2 NIC.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> "Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> It is possible to allow IP routing without using RRAS, but it is
>>> pretty pointless. Simply configure RRAS to be a LAN router from the
>>> wizard and it will do it for you.
>>>
>>> As Jeremy pointed out, all this does is configure the machine so that
>>> it can forward traffic from one subnet to the other. Whether it routes
>>> or not depends on how the two subnets are configured.
>>>
>>> If all you want to do is link these two subnets, the routing is
>>> trivial. You simply make the RRAS router the default gateway for both
>>> subnets. eg
>>>
>>> 192.168.1.x dg 192.168.1.1
>>> |
>>> 192.168.1.1 dg blank
>>> RRAS
>>> 192.168.2.1 dg blank
>>> |
>>> 192.168.2.x dg 192.168.2.1
>>>
>>> Any traffic which is not local (ie not in the same IP subnet) is sent
>>> to the router. The router can deliver it in the other subnet because it
>>> has an interface in that subnet (ie the target machine is local to the
>>> router).
>>>
>>> Usually the setup is not as simple as that. One subnet is usually
>>> using some other router, such as an ADSL Internet device as its default
>>> gateway. Simply enabling IP routing doesn't do much because the trafffic
>>> never gets to the RRAS router. You need extra routing to get the traffic
>>> to the correct router. If you are in that situation and can't see what
>>> extra routing you need, post a description of how your network is set
>>> up.
>>>
>>> PS. I hope this server is not a DC. Using a DC as a router is not
>>> recomended and it may cause you all sorts of odd problems.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

OK. As I said in a previous post, the important thing about routing is
getting the traffic to the correct router. If this RRAS router is an
additional router in a subnet which currently uses some other device as the
default gateway (ie default router) the traffic for the other site may never
get to the RRAS router unless you add extra routing to the LAN. It only
works automatically if there is only one gateway and it is set as the
default.

Dear Bill,

There is default gateway in headquarter and remote site. However, the
network guy says that in order to get both sites get connected with the new
lease line, he has to remove the default gateway at remote site and make use
of the Windows 2003 Server as router here.

In this way, I believe that machines in remote site will regard the Windows
2003 Server as default gateway while machines here will continue to use the
existing default gateway (CISCO Router).

Is there any adjustment has to be done ?

Regards,
Peter

"Peter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> There is default gateway in headquarter and remote site. However, the network
> guy says that in order to get both sites get connected with the new lease
> line, he has to remove the default gateway at remote site and make use > of
> the Windows 2003 Server as router here.

It doesn't matter what router is used for the Default Gateway as long as the
router that is used "knows" how to get to everything else. So the network guys
are "partially" correct, but they may have too narrow of a view of it.

The Default Gateway of the hosts on any particular subnet should be the router
that has the most "knowledge" about the rest of the LAN/WAN. That "knowledge"
may or may not be accomplished by Dynamic Routing Protocols between the routers.

--
Phillip Windell
www.wandtv.com

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft, or
anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------

Hi

Could someone please advise me if the following solution is a viable option, to minimise our network traffic and speed up perfomance with regards to our CGI render farm data flow.

The sistuation is a follows.

We have a CGI render farm of 60 Dell quad core blade servers all hosted on the same IP subnet and physical network as our 3d Animators and production office.

The current physical LAN is running at 100mb. I am looking to optimise our data through put on our render farm, by creating a seperate physical network / subnet and upgrading the render farm to a gig network.
I want to keep the network seperate to reduce network traffic and optimse data flow.

Is it safe to asssume, that if I install a Win2k3 Server with 2 NIC's one attached to each network and configured as a router, will the users still be able to submit data to the gig renderfarm network and will this reduce and optimse my traffic?

Sure, You can setup the server as router. This how to may help.

How to setup VPNIf your VPN client cannot find servers or cannot ping
computernmae, you may need to add DNS and WINS into your VPN server. For
example, to add DNS and WINS ...
www.howtonetworking.com/Windows/vpnsetup.htm


--
Bob Lin, MS-MVP, MCSE & CNE
Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Troubleshooting on
http://www.ChicagoTech.net
How to Setup Windows, Network, VPN & Remote Access on
http://www.HowToNetworking.com
"GarethHughes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Hi
>
> Could someone please advise me if the following solution is a viable
> option, to minimise our network traffic and speed up perfomance with
> regards to our CGI render farm data flow.
>
> The sistuation is a follows.
>
> We have a CGI render farm of 60 Dell quad core blade servers all hosted
> on the same IP subnet and physical network as our 3d Animators and
> production office.
>
> The current physical LAN is running at 100mb. I am looking to optimise
> our data through put on our render farm, by creating a seperate physical
> network / subnet and upgrading the render farm to a gig network.
> I want to keep the network seperate to reduce network traffic and
> optimse data flow.
>
> Is it safe to asssume, that if I install a Win2k3 Server with 2 NIC's
> one attached to each network and configured as a router, will the users
> still be able to submit data to the gig renderfarm network and will this
> reduce and optimse my traffic?
>
>
> --
> GarethHughes
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> GarethHughes's Profile:
> http://forums.techarena.in/members/garethhughes.htm
> View this thread: http://forums.techarena.in/server-networking/738480.htm
>
> http://forums.techarena.in
>

"GarethHughes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Hi
>
> Could someone please advise me if the following solution is a viable
> option, to minimise our network traffic and speed up perfomance with
> regards to our CGI render farm data flow.
>
> The sistuation is a follows.
>
> We have a CGI render farm of 60 Dell quad core blade servers all hosted
> on the same IP subnet and physical network as our 3d Animators and
> production office.
>
> The current physical LAN is running at 100mb. I am looking to optimise
> our data through put on our render farm, by creating a seperate physical
> network / subnet and upgrading the render farm to a gig network.
> I want to keep the network seperate to reduce network traffic and
> optimse data flow.
>
> Is it safe to asssume, that if I install a Win2k3 Server with 2 NIC's
> one attached to each network and configured as a router, will the users
> still be able to submit data to the gig renderfarm network and will this
> reduce and optimse my traffic?
>
>
> --
> GarethHughes
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> GarethHughes's Profile:
> http://forums.techarena.in/members/garethhughes.htm
> View this thread: http://forums.techarena.in/server-networking/738480.htm
>
> http://forums.techarena.in
>

You can certainly use Windows Server as a LAN router between two LAN
segments, and these two segments can be of different types. The server
network will run at IGb and the other at 100Mb.

Just installing RRAS and enabling LAN routing will probably not get
routing working. It only works automatically if the router is the default
gateway for both networks. If one network is connected to the Internet and
all machines use the Internet router as the default gateway, no traffic will
ever go to the internal router.

There are a couple of options. If the LAN machines need to initiate
connections to the servers (but not vice versa) you can use NAT. If you need
full interaction (ie the servers can initiate connections to the other
machines) you use standard LAN routing plus static routes. eg

NAT setup

Internet
|
gateway router
10.1.1.254
|
servers
10.1.1.x dg 10.1.1.254
|
10.1.1.250 dg 10.1.1.254
RRAS/NAT
192.168.31.254 dg blank
|
LAN machines
192.168.31.x dg 192.168.31.x


Fully routed setup

Internet
|
gateway router {static route 192.168.31.0 255.255.255.0 10.1.1.250}
10.1.1.254
|
servers
10.1.1.x dg 10.1.1.254
|
10.1.1.250 dg 10.1.1.254
RRAS
192.168.31.254 dg blank
|
LAN machines
192.168.31.x dg 192.168.31.254

The NAT method works because all traffic from the inner subnet is using
the NAT router's 10.1.1 address in the outer subnet (because of address
translation in NAT).

In the second case the traffic from the inner subnet is using the
192.168. IP address, so the gateway router must know how to reach the inner
subnet (via the NAT router).

Hi,
i dont see the clear advantage if all traffic passes the wire to / and from
the router to the switch.

first you should know how the serverfarm itself operates ? especially do
they communicate with each other ?

jk