 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Windows Forum / Windows 98 / Networking / March 2007WIn98se ICS odd timing/connect loss issues cropping up, still there after reinstall... advice ?
Hullo all, Have had win98se with ICS working fine for a couple of years at least but since a reinstall/re-enable of ICS it has been acting a bit weird... a. DHCP wont work anymore for the client computer ie Client is not able to get an address from the Hosts DHCP, so I have fixed it at 192.168.0.2 with mask 255.255.255.0 b. The client cycles each 10mins or so of internet connectivity ie. After a boot up, the client is ok for about 10 mins then for another 10mins or so cant do any net access then it comes back again for a few mins then off again. A ping -t of my ISP's DNS shows slow access of from 200 - 1000ms or more then timeouts then access is back again, doesnt correlate with website or emails etc This is now the continuous mode and is very frustrating ! c. The host PC is also having cycling issues but not nearly as bad as above. Each 20mins or so it doesnt do any bit torrent uploads for about a min then its ok again and although not as regular as the client the host has a rough cycle of 15 to 20min uploads then 30 sec to 1min of stall. Other net acess at the time seems ok on the host. d. Cant ping the modem from the client, ie 10.1.1.1 comes with timeout always but can ping 192.168.0.1 and 10.1.1.2 always but not always able to ping the ISP DNS or other net addresses due to the cycling described in b. e. Can always ping the client ok from the host f. Have the port forward done ok in ICS so uTorrent is ok etc Here are the IP addresses:- 10.1.1.1 dsl-502t on host with latest firmware 10.1.1.2 Host pc 192.168.0.1 Host PC lan card rtl8029as (coax 10baset) 192.168.0.2 Client PC on 10baset lan card rtl8029as Have done the usual re-install and my route table on the host is:- (not that I fully understand it, hence my paste here for advice?) Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.2 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.2 1 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.1.1.2 10.1.1.2 1 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.1.1.2 10.1.1.2 1 10.1.1.2 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 10.1.1.2 10.1.1.2 1 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 192.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 192.168.0.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 10.1.1.2 10.1.1.2 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 10.1.1.2 10.1.1.2 1 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 What can I do to make this work properly as the cards seem fine when driven from their test programs and file transfers are ok at 1333Kbits/sec between host and clients etc And its odd I cannot ping 10.1.1.1 from the client at all ? <sigh>  SignatureRegards Mike * GMC/GMH VK/VL FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option. * Australian VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress. * Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars http://niche.iinet.net.au >Hullo all, > >Have had win98se with ICS working fine for a couple of years at least but >since a reinstall/re-enable of ICS it has been acting a bit weird... <snip> >Here are the IP addresses:- > >10.1.1.1 dsl-502t on host with latest firmware The dsl-502t is a router with its own nat sharing capability so you should *NOT* be using ICS on win98se. This would cause all sorts of problems not least of which is conflicting dhcp servers. Disable ICS, reset the computers to use dhcp to get their addresses and if everything isn't back to normal then post in detail how all your kit is connected together and someone will be able to tell you where you're going wrong. Jim. >The dsl-502t is a router with its own nat sharing capability so you >should *NOT* be using ICS on win98se. This would cause all sorts of >problems not least of which is conflicting dhcp servers. my dsl-502t has one usb and one utp connection and I am only using the utp to connect to my host pc. dhcp is disabled in the 502 and the PC's ip of 10.1.1.2 is set manually. >Disable ICS, reset the computers to use dhcp to get their addresses >and if everything isn't back to normal then post in detail how all >your kit is connected together and someone will be able to tell you >where you're going wrong. If I disable ICS then the client pc has no access at all. Config is this:- adsl into 502t with utp to the host motherboard lan connection host also has an rtl8029 card with coax cabled to the client with the same type of card. As I mentioned, its been working fine for 2+ years, only recently have odd slowdowns occured even after reinstall :( SignatureRegards Mike * VK/VL Commodore FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option. * VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress. * Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars http://niche.iinet.net.au >If I disable ICS then the client pc has no access at all. > >Config is this:- >adsl into 502t with utp to the host motherboard lan connection >host also has an rtl8029 card with coax cabled to the client with >the same type of card. Okay. If you can afford it then the best solution would be to get a switch and plug all three devices into it. There is a solution using your existing kit but it requires a bit more configuration. You need the host to be a router but not a nat (ics) router. So first of all, disable ICS. Then, enable routing in the registry as follows System Key: [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\VxD\MSTCP] Value Name: EnableRouting Data Type: (string value) Value Data: (0 = disabled, 1 = enabled) Then using the ip addresses from your first post. Router 10.1.1.1 add static route to send traffic for network 192.168.0.0 via 10.1.1.2 HostPC 10.1.1.2 connected to the router 192.168.0.1 connected to the client default gateway 10.1.1.1 enable dns - nameservers as notified by your isp or 10.1.1.1 ClientPC 192.168.0.2 default gateway 192.168.0.1 enable dns - nameservers as notified by your isp or 10.1.1.1 Jim. >If you can afford it then the best solution would be to get a switch >and plug all three devices into it. mmmm, if I can just get back to what I had before then I would be happy, even though my coax lan is only 10Meg, it worked perfectly for years with the current hardware, and I was easily able to add runs to the coax for 3 other PCs when my kids friends came over for a small lan game party, thats what I liked about the coax - it just need me to add a piece of coax and move the terminator - much easier than adding a hub and I didnt mind it being half-duplex the games they play dont put much b/w need. So I am guessing some config snafuuu has occured which doesnt get cleared when doing a reinstall, maybe it writes to the eeprom on the network card as well as some correlated setting in the modem making it cyclically kludge from time to time... >There is a solution using your existing kit but it requires a bit more >configuration. You need the host to be a router but not a nat (ics) >router. > >So first of all, disable ICS. Ok I will give this a go, though I've never had to do any of the registry changes before when setting up ICS some 10 times or so for my systems over last 6 years for family and friends... Am I guessing correctly I need to re-enable ICS after the procedure below ? Please see my other queries below, >Then, enable routing in the registry as follows > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >10.1.1.1 >add static route to send traffic for network 192.168.0.0 via 10.1.1.2 Does this mean I need to use the DOS route command, there are so many entries in that already I am not sure precisely of the format of the route print in terms of what it displays for example and what syntax I need to issue to make it add the static route you mention etc >HostPC >10.1.1.2 connected to the router >192.168.0.1 connected to the client >default gateway 10.1.1.1 >enable dns - nameservers as notified by your isp or 10.1.1.1 Ok, this seems like what I already have but will check it thoroughly, >ClientPC >192.168.0.2 >default gateway 192.168.0.1 >enable dns - nameservers as notified by your isp or 10.1.1.1 Given I couldnt even ping 10.1.1.1 before (or rather after the ICS was re-enabled) then assuming the host changes and "adding a static route" as you advise above then I should be able to ping 10.1.1.1 thereafter, which suggests my registry got gurgled... > Jim. Thanks Jim, I had wondered why Win98se needed icsmgr to run, as if its just a routing issue and if it doesnt need to be re-enabled then would the routing just do it - of course if it does then I guess that makes more sense but begs the question why it worked fine for 2+ years without registry changes ? SignatureRegards Mike * VK/VL Commodore FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option. * VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress. * Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars http://niche.iinet.net.au >>So first of all, disable ICS. > >Ok I will give this a go, though I've never had to do any of the >registry changes before when setting up ICS some 10 times or so for >my systems over last 6 years for family and friends... Am I guessing >correctly I need to re-enable ICS after the procedure below ? No. This procedure doesn't use ICS. Editing the registry as described enables routing without enabling ICS. Your router will be doing the address translation (sharing) far more efficiently than ICS. >Please see my other queries below, > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >route print in terms of what it displays for example and what syntax I >need to issue to make it add the static route you mention etc No. Your router will probably have a web interface for its configuration. Look in the manual for setting up static routes via the web interface. If you don't have the manual there is a pdf on the d-link website. >>HostPC >>10.1.1.2 connected to the router [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >route" as you advise above then I should be able to ping 10.1.1.1 thereafter, >which suggests my registry got gurgled... Until you configure the router to forward replies via the "host" pc then it cannot reply because it does not know where to send the packets for the client pc. (sidenote: if you were using ICS this wouldn't be necessary because as far as the router is concerned everything is coming from the host pc) >> Jim. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >do it - of course if it does then I guess that makes more sense but begs >the question why it worked fine for 2+ years without registry changes ? You could do it using ics, but since the router is already doing the address translation you would be building in a needless bottleneck (doing the same translation operation twice). Check the ping times when it's done. If the boys do Internet gaming they will certainly notice a *BIG* difference. Jim. >No. This procedure doesn't use ICS. Editing the registry as described >enables routing without enabling ICS. Your router will be doing the >address translation (sharing) far more efficiently than ICS. Of course, I'd forgotten about that, just because my box doesnt have multiple UTP ports I'd forgotten it can translate the addresses, ie. Being such a little box I'd forgotten it can do rather more... So it just means the host pc will pass the relevant packets by editing/enabling the registry key - I didnt know that Win98se was capable of that level of packet switching and had always assumed the ICSMGR (ie as an ICS install) was needed for that function, I'm glad its not so it might run a bit quicker overall as well :) Strangely, when I first asked Dlink about the modem their tech dept suggested I keep using ICS, hence for 2+ years thats all I thought was required, I could have saved a heap of time if dlink had explained it the way you have... <sigh> >>>System Key: >>>[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\VxD\MSTCP] >>>Value Name: EnableRouting >>>Data Type: (string value) >>>Value Data: (0 = disabled, 1 = enabled) Ok, I understand that the OS can pass the packets but I'm not sure how the OS knows to pass them to the RTL8029 card and not some host resident process ? >No. Your router will probably have a web interface for its >configuration. Look in the manual for setting up static routes via the >web interface. If you don't have the manual there is a pdf on the >d-link website. ok np, have used the modem web interface many times but it hadnt twigged I could over-ride/replace the windows ICS, as per Dlinks comment... I'll go through the details later tonight, >>Given I couldnt even ping 10.1.1.1 before (or rather after the ICS >>was re-enabled) then assuming the host changes and "adding a static [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >then it cannot reply because it does not know where to send the >packets for the client pc. Thats the part I'm a little hazy on, the router gets a data packet either from any host resident process or from the client via the RTL8029 card but the host needs to know where to put the reply that comes from the modem (after it gets its reply from the net). This is where I thought the mass of code in ICS and the .dlls was required. I infer you are saying that with the routing enabled in windows os via an enabled registry key and the static route in the modem that windows will "follow suit" and pass the replies back to either the host process or the client via the rtl8029 card - its that last bit that I'm not clear on in respect of that capacity already built into the OS - not much confirmation of that since day one sadly. >(sidenote: if you were using ICS this wouldn't be necessary because as >far as the router is concerned everything is coming from the host pc) Ok, its slowly beginning to gel that the router maps its replies from the source requests it got from a host process or a client packet and that the capacity to route is already within the OS and hence that must mean that ICSMGR didnt really do that much in the first place except maybe 'some' NAT and buffering - hence why its generally slow from day one. >You could do it using ics, but since the router is already doing the >address translation you would be building in a needless bottleneck >(doing the same translation operation twice). Yes, excellent point. I did have a try with an NB1300 some 4 years ago to do some of this - rather to get it to work but IP routing isnt my area of expertise (its electronic design) and although the NB1300 was supposed to have NAT - my system/it could well have suffered from a heap of combinatorial issues not allowing it to function, hence I used ICS with the nb1300 too long before I got the Dlink 502t... >Check the ping times when it's done. If the boys do Internet gaming >they will certainly notice a *BIG* difference. Excellent, should make my other browsing faster too, thanks for your help, will give it a go later tonight when my lab stuff is over, cheers SignatureRegards Mike * VK/VL Commodore FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option. * VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress. * Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars http://niche.iinet.net.au >Ok, I understand that the OS can pass the packets but I'm not sure >how the OS knows to pass them to the RTL8029 card and not some host >resident process ? Every packet will have a source and destination address so the host can easily determine which packets are for it and which are to be sent on using the rules in the routing table. <snip> >>Until you configure the router to forward replies via the "host" pc >>then it cannot reply because it does not know where to send the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >but the host needs to know where to put the reply that comes from the modem >(after it gets its reply from the net). The nat router will replace the destination address in return packets with the corresponding source addess it stripped on outgoing packets so the hostpc will simply look at the destination address of packets forwarded to it and either use them locally or forward them on again. Jim >Every packet will have a source and destination address so the host >can easily determine which packets are for it and which are to be sent >on using the rules in the routing table. Brilliant, of course, forgot about that, understood and cemented now :) >The nat router will replace the destination address in return packets >with the corresponding source addess it stripped on outgoing packets >so the hostpc will simply look at the destination address of packets >forwarded to it and either use them locally or forward them on again. Fantastic, got it :) . . . Ok <cough> have done all the changes you outlined, checked them, saved the modem changes, rebooted, power cycled etc etc. And Voila *yes* I can get internet access on the client pc 'some' of the time along with the host subject to the timing oddities coming back ! (I actually uninstalled ICS and not just disabled it - was that an error ?) But the registry key was already set to enable btw and it still is... Client off, power up only the host and modem - it struggles to get internet connectivity unless I visit the modem's web interface and go to the Status display, here is a scenario I just tested:- Restart host and modem. None of the loaded tasks need internet access and the modem is set to "always on" Open a dos box and type ping -t 203.0.178.191 (and leave it running) I get "Request timed out" all the time for the 6-7 min I could wait Then visit the modem web page 10.1.1.1 and went to the status display Within about 30 to 60 secs I got ping replies of about 20ms on average and this continued until I closed the IE window and then within about 2 min I get ping timeouts again. Puzzled I checked that I have "Logon and restore network connections" (yes) went back to modem web interface and then to tools and their ping function and although the host got timeouts the modem's ping tool never did ! So assuming my modem is ok and I believe the ping tool in it, then what can I do to diagnose this ? I did repeat the modem web access through IE and after about a minute got the dos box to show ping replies, closed IE and this time the pings seem to keep going ok with times of 20 - 21ms and whilst composing this reply they have kept going. On earlier occasions I noticed the client pings of the isp dns match those of the host in terms of replies and timeouts... Is there a win98se compatible tool that might pin this down or do I have to start from scratch again :( ? oh btw: If I open uTorrent then within 20 sec I will get a block of 15 ping timeouts again and then back to connectivity but with ping replies of 180-600mS and some timeouts and these timeouts correlate with drop of u/l b/w in uTorrent to zero... Just sit and wait and *ah* ping replies again until uTorrent makes some connections then ping replies start to reach 600mS, u/l b/w drops gradually then more timeouts... Seems like what was happening before with ICS, does it point to modem firmware and what tool could definitively pin this down ? PS: The modem has an entry for Lan clients and only have the host as the one lan client as its the only other thing on that UTP connection, I didnt add the other pc as the modem wont accept its IP (outside 10.1.1.2 - 10.1.1.254) and the route to it is through the os etc... The route table entry in the modem seems fine though as the client does get reliable connections for each request - well within the bounds of this issue of loss and recovery of internet connectivity now im depressed. SignatureRegards Mike * VK/VL Commodore FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option. * VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress. * Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars http://niche.iinet.net.au >>Every packet will have a source and destination address so the host >>can easily determine which packets are for it and which are to be sent [quoted text clipped - 83 lines] > > now im depressed. do happen to have MAC addressing enabled on the router ? (mine re-enables after a reset ) >do happen to have MAC addressing enabled on the router ? (mine re-enables >after a reset ) Cant see this in any of the menus except the DHCP and I have DHCP disabled and all addresses set manually. Should I maybe place the router MAC address in they network neighbourhood to "force" windows so it wont go off the rails in case there is some bug in the router code, ie As a work around if its a 'dont care', ie Can I set it so it becomes a dont care if everything should be working anyway ? SignatureRegards Mike * VK/VL Commodore FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option. * VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress. * Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars http://niche.iinet.net.au >. > >Ok <cough> have done all the changes you outlined, checked them, saved >the modem changes, rebooted, power cycled etc etc. And Voila *yes* I can >get internet access on the client pc 'some' of the time along with the >host subject to the timing oddities coming back ! Hmmm. Disappointing. However, when you eventually get it going it will be better than before with this revised set up. >(I actually uninstalled ICS and not just disabled it - was that an error ?) >But the registry key was already set to enable btw and it still is... I think that's okay. If you eventually do a clean install you will have to make the registry change. Routing is off by default. >Client off, power up only the host and modem - it struggles to get >internet connectivity unless I visit the modem's web interface and go to [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >this continued until I closed the IE window and then within about 2 min I get >ping timeouts again. I'm fairly sure your router is working fine and the hostpc has its knickers in a twist. >Puzzled I checked that I have "Logon and restore network connections" (yes) That isn't relevant to this issue. >went back to modem web interface and then to tools and their ping function >and although the host got timeouts the modem's ping tool never did ! More evidence in favour of zapping the hostpc >So assuming my modem is ok and I believe the ping tool in it, then what can >I do to diagnose this ? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Is there a win98se compatible tool that might pin this down or do I have >to start from scratch again :( ? I've never come across this before . If all else fails I would be inclined to do a clean re-install of the hostpc. That would be my next step. If you eventually need to do this, ensure you don't carry over any registry corruption by following this procedure : Boot your machine from a boot floppy and select cd support (assuming windows is on a cd) c: cd c:\windows attrib -r -h -s system.dat attrib -r -h -s user.dat ren system.dat system.xxx ren user.dat user.xxx Then run setup from your cd. >PS: >The modem has an entry for Lan clients and only have the host as the one >lan client as its the only other thing on that UTP connection, I didnt >add the other pc as the modem wont accept its IP (outside 10.1.1.2 - 10.1.1.254) >and the route to it is through the os etc... I'm not sure what this setting is for, You need to look in the manual for this. Jim >>(I actually uninstalled ICS and not just disabled it - was that an error ?) >>But the registry key was already set to enable btw and it still is... > >I think that's okay. If you eventually do a clean install you will >have to make the registry change. Routing is off by default. After a clean install (see comments at end) the key is not there at all, should I enter it manually and if so what other corresponding key should be present if any ? >I'm fairly sure your router is working fine and the hostpc has its >knickers in a twist. Thats what I was thinking but, the firmware version for the dsl-502t has been updated a couple of times, one release note indicate due to p2p issues. Now I'm not sure the latest version is stable as, on reflection, the problems have arisen since the last firmware upgrade, though its been on the site for a while. I cant go back to the old version because the modem's firmware update interface is broken and although I have the correct file from the web page and it was the previous one updated some time ago it says "The update file you chosed is incorrect." and the broken english in the error report doesnt inspire confidence. >>went back to modem web interface and then to tools and their ping function >>and although the host got timeouts the modem's ping tool never did ! > >More evidence in favour of zapping the hostpc The host pc certainly needed it anyway as it was over a year since the last reinstall and probably due for it, see notes later. >If you eventually need to do this, ensure you don't carry over any >registry corruption by following this procedure : Yes good point, learned that early on, plus also good to remove the r???.cab files in the sysbackup and I also get rid of system.1st (maybe?). Somehow the first time I tried a clean install but didnt get rid of the sysbackup, I had my old registry settings come back, even in a new directory (WIN2 etc), quite puzzling as there shouldnt be any link to it... >>The modem has an entry for Lan clients and only have the host as the one >>lan client as its the only other thing on that UTP connection, I didnt [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >I'm not sure what this setting is for, You need to look in the manual >for this. Apparently not necessary unless port forwarding is selected from the 'server' rules, since I use uTorrent and want it to connect quickly Ive set this up and it wont do any port forwarding unless the "Lan clients" has the right entry. The question that arises, is that if I want port forwarding for the client then I will have to change addresses so they fit in the lan clients range up to 10.1.1.254 and whether it will work with the route enable you suggest because I think its only for connections on the UTP but who knows for sure, anyway least of my problems... Here's the update:- - Clean install with all the same hardware and a reset of modem results in problem still there, so I'm aghast thinking my modem has developed some weird fault since a firmware upgrade. - I remove the rtl8029 pci lan card and try again, - Voila ! I have net access almost immediately upon bootup - hooray. - Plug rtl8029 card back in, locate the realtek reset and config utility for the card which also has a full self test, with the card from dos, the utility self test and cycles report all ok no prob at all. - Restart windows and problem is back again, its as if the hostpc doesnt know where to get net access from, is it possible its trying the RTL8029 gives up and switches to the other lan interface. As there is no option in IE tools to select which LAN connection for the net I am wondering if, not having it explicitly set, that given the firmware upgrade for the 502T that windows cycles between both ethernet interfaces, possibly because the modem firmware has some sort of flakey ack bug ? - Anyway for moment I have gone to control panel/system and disabled the RTL8029 but left it plugged in and net access is ok, will find another card and try again later when I have more patience or just switch it to a different slot in case its some int/buffer conflict that doesnt show up otherwise. ie All reports in Control Panel/System show no problems... - Is it possible I have a wrong entry in the network neighbourhood for all this time that only just now, with all the other changes, becomes an issue, questions that arise for the "TCP/IP -> Realtek RTL8029 PCI Ethernet NIC" :- Have set manual IP of 192.168.0.1 with mask of 255.255.255.0 Had gateway of 10.1.1.1 DNS enable comes up same as LAN to Modem and its Host=labtemp server 203.0.178.191 But, what I am not sure about is the "Allow Binding to ATM", what should this be and should the box "Set this protocol to the default protocol" be ticked (I had it as No and not ticked), Is there some inspection s/w tool that can show me where packets are supposed to be going or attempted etc So I can diagnose what is happening when the RTL8029 is enabled or some other thing I can check whilst I await reply from DLink ? Thanks for your help so far, I think I am almost there... SignatureRegards Mike * VK/VL Commodore FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option. * VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress. * Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars http://niche.iinet.net.au >>>(I actually uninstalled ICS and not just disabled it - was that an error ?) >>>But the registry key was already set to enable btw and it still is... [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >should I enter it manually and if so what other corresponding key should be present >if any ? Yes you have to enter it manually. If it isn't there at all it takes the default value (which is off). <snip> >Here's the update:- > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >- Voila ! > I have net access almost immediately upon bootup - hooray. What does your routing table say with this card enabled and then disabled? Any differences there might shed some light. <snip> > > But, what I am not sure about is the "Allow Binding to ATM", what should > this be and should the box "Set this protocol to the default protocol" be ticked > (I had it as No and not ticked), Don't know. 99.9% of the time these settings should be left as the installation default. >Is there some inspection s/w tool that can show me where packets are supposed >to be going or attempted etc So I can diagnose what is happening when the RTL8029 >is enabled or some other thing I can check whilst I await reply from DLink ? > >Thanks for your help so far, I think I am almost there... If the routing table(s) don't throw up any clues then I can't think what the cause might be. It's not my field either so I can't recommend any utils. Jim. >Yes you have to enter it manually. If it isn't there at all it takes >the default value (which is off). ok, np, done that in sequence described later:- >What does your routing table say with this card enabled and then >disabled? Any differences there might shed some light. Ok Jim, Here is the sequence of changes with corresponding route tables and in all cases the client machine is off. I did change the PC ip address from 10.1.1.2 to 10.1.1.5 as this is the IP that dlink recommend when doing a firmware upgrade, so I did a firmware refresh of the dlink, re-entered all the settings, upnp is off, dhcp is off, lan client is 10.1.1.5, port forwarding of one port enabled, rebooted the modem and the pc and as it was working fine the router from this point on hasnt been touched and left running without any changes... 1. All net working ok, pings all ok, RTL8029as card installed but disabled (whenok.txt) Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.5 1 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 10.1.1.5 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 2. RTL8029as card enabled in win98 controlpanel/system, got hour glass of some activity but, pings all ok, not yet rebooted but route table had changed without having done a reboot. ie Hourglass signified some possible change, here is. (enabled.txt) Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.5 1 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 10.1.1.5 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 3. Rebooted to make sure any tendrils of enabling RTL8029 needed to filter through, pings to ISP dns came up straight away all ok. (reboot.txt) Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.5 1 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 10.1.1.5 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 192.168.0.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 4. Inserted reg entry to enable routing per your advice, saved copy and rebooted, net all ok, pings to ISP dns all ok. (enable_reboot.txt) Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.5 1 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 10.1.1.5 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 192.168.0.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 5. Everything seemed to be running ok, I was a bit puzzled because before this is where things started to go haywire. However, I checked network neighbourhood properties and found the gateway entry on the RTL8029 wasnt set to anything, so changed this to 10.1.1.1 and rebooted. This is when the net access went bad and started doing the cycle thing. ie. Took about a min before I could ping dns, then ok for a few mins, then off for a few mins etc etc, here is route table when system in that problematic state. (gateway_reboot.txt) Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.5 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 192.168.0.1 1 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 10.1.1.5 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 192.168.0.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 6. In the above state the net is almost unusable and unsatisfactory so I disabled the gateway for the RTL8029, rebooted and all net activity was ok again, pings to dns consistent, but leaves the RTL8029 without a gateway so possibly no client net access... Here is route table, gateway cleared, rebooted. (no_gateway_reboot.txt) Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.5 1 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 10.1.1.5 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 192.168.0.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 10.1.1.5 10.1.1.5 1 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1 I notice the route table gets its entries moved around between reboots but does that matter since the numbers seem to be the same for the most part and I dont understand the differences though it seems a bit logical, I cant make sense of the extra entries that seem like padding and I wonder if the "Metric" isnt some priority issue - dont know ? Since changing the gateway in the RTL8029 config makes things go nuts.ie. Adding 10.1.1.1 makes it bad, then removing 10.1.1.1 makes it ok is pretty good evidence its not some other thing unless the router cant make sense of where its supposed to reply to requests ie. Is it possible its trying to send replies to the RTL8029 instead of the process that made the intial request, then here is all the entries for the network neighbourhood RTL8029 TCP/IP settings, should I choose a different gateway address perhaps, have I made a mask error etc ? IP Address / IP Specified 192.168.0.1 Mask 255.255.255.0 WINS Config/ Disable WINS Resolution Gateway/ none specified DNS Config/ Host = labtemp, no domain, one entry of 203.0.178.191 Bindings/ Client for Microsoft Networks ticked, file and print sharing unticked Advanced/ Allow Binding to ATM = no, default protocol box unticked Netbios/ I want to enable NETBIOS over TCP/IP, ticked and Grayed out FWIW, here are the settings for the LAN interface to the router via the motherboards on board lan (VIA VT6102 Rhine II Fast Ethernet Adapter) :- IP Address / IP Specified 10.1.1.5 Mask 255.0.0.0 WINS Config/ Disable WINS Resolution Gateway/ 10.1.1.1 DNS Config/ Host = labtemp, no domain, one entry of 203.0.178.191 Bindings/ Client for Microsoft Networks ticked, file and print sharing unticked Advanced/ Allow Binding to ATM = no, default protocol box is ticked this time ! Netbios/ I want to enable NETBIOS over TCP/IP, ticked and Grayed out The only other changes I did, which didnt affect anything was increase the buffers on the LAN interface to the router from 64 per transmit/receive to 128. I have 512Megs ram in the PC and think it can afford to allocate a bit more buffer space, this didnt change anything though... Sent a tech support email to Dlink last night describing issue as much as possible and referenced this newgroup and postings, no ack as yet, bit early I guess... SignatureRegards Mike * VK/VL Commodore FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option. * VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress. * Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars http://niche.iinet.net.au >5. Everything seemed to be running ok, I was a bit puzzled because before this is > where things started to go haywire. However, I checked network neighbourhood [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.5 1 > 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 192.168.0.1 1 This looks to be the source of the problem. There should only be one default gateway on the hostpc. The first line above is correct which is set on the onboard adaptor. Leave the RTL8029 gateway blank which will remove the second line. This won't affect the client routing. Jim. >> Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Interface Metric >> 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.5 1 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >This won't affect the client routing. Ah ha, I should have said that when I had the gateway clear on the RTL8029 the first time that the client PC didnt have any net access though could see each others files without problem but couldnt ping the router from the client or any net IP. But the host could ping the client. The sequence I desribed was repeated on one occasion with the client tried a few times, I just shortened it and checked it for purpose of brevity. But all this time I had forgotten to set the static route in the router after the initial partial success <doh> ! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ So once that was in - everything works a treat :o) ! I am now manically happy all is going well, you have no idea what a relief as my client pcs emails had accumulated and that is where I do most work from late at night with heaps of odd tech sites I review etc <sigh> The ping of my ISP dns from the client is around 20ms and on average the same as from the host which is also going very smoothly. I just have to limit the u/l bandwidth of uTorrent so it wont clog the output queue... So I must say many thanks for your patience and accuracy, it has been a great experience to follow your reasoning and become more acquatined with the issues of networking in general and as relates specifically to my setup which I think for as long as possible I will keep with 98se and resist as far as possible to 'upgrade', thankyou :) -- Now I will be looking at the simplest way to allow my son to dial into my machine so he can get onto the net from his mothers place across town during the week. So I have another learning curve there it seems, dial up networking with 98se (i am told) is mostly straightforward with occasional pitfalls but I have time to a.ses that. ie I would be looking to have my son dial in on the same line I have adsl on, but of course have a filter between the line and the dialup modem (netcom) which I also understand wouldnt go any faster than 33K... Some 2 years ago I tried a program called 'netfor2' for the host which worked surprisingly well and allowed my lab laptop to have its own net access across from my host pc and all connected through a simple 3 wire RS232, it didnt allow shared file transfer just relayed internet requests. Something like that which my son could have email and web access to would be ideal, SignatureRegards Mike * VK/VL Commodore FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option. * VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress. * Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars http://niche.iinet.net.au >So I must say many thanks for your patience and accuracy, it has been a great >experience to follow your reasoning and become more acquatined with the issues >of networking in general and as relates specifically to my setup which I >think for as long as possible I will keep with 98se and resist as far as >possible to 'upgrade', thankyou :) You are welcome. >Now I will be looking at the simplest way to allow my son to dial into >my machine so he can get onto the net from his mothers place across town [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >but of course have a filter between the line and the dialup modem (netcom) >which I also understand wouldnt go any faster than 33K... You should be able to you use the dialup server which comes with win98. You will get more flexibility by putting the remote machine(s) on a different subnet just like you have with your own clientpc This subject cropped up some time ago in another short thread which I tracked down in the google archives. Although it used the NT remote access service rather than the win98 DUN server the principle is the same so the thread will be worth a read. http://preview.tinyurl.com/25ny8h http://tinyurl.com/25ny8h Regards Jim. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.