 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Windows Forum / Windows Me / Networking / August 2004IP Problems on WindowsME??
Hi all I visited a client today with a network of 4 PCs configured as follows: 1st PC: PC with internet gateway running WindowsXP Pro and fixed IP 192.168.0.1 2nd PC: A SERVER PC running windows 98SE and fixed IP 192.168.0.2 3rd PC: Running WindowsXP Home and fixed IP 192.168.0.3 4th PC: Running WindowsME and dynamic IP 192.168.0.84 All PCs used the DSL internet connection of the 1st PC. All PCs were able to access each other and use any shares setup. All PCs connected by CAT5 to a 5 port hub The 1st PC's internet connection was via an attached USB broadband modem The system was working just fine until my visit today!!! My brief was to install a new DSLModem/Wireless/Router and add a new notebook PC to the LAN wirelessly and enable internet connection to it. I removed the old hub and USB modem from the 1st PC. I then reconfigured the Network cards of 1st, 2nd & 3rd PCs to obtain their IP addresses dynamically from the new router. I installed the new 3Com DSLModem/Wireless/Router using it's default IP 192.168.1.1. In short, PCs 1, 2 & 3 were returned to full functionality enjoying the internet connection and shares etc etc. I then restarted the 4th PC expecting it to have a new IP in the 192.168.1.* range. After restarting I used the IPCONFIG command from a DOS window which showed the IP address to be the old 192.168.0.84. I tried to PING the router at 192.168.1.1 and it failed! I restarted the PC again but still it had the IP address 192.168.0.1. Pinging the router again failed! I then fixed the IP address at 192.168.1.84, restarted the PC and this time I was able to PING the router however. I could not get an internet connection. I treid setting the Gateway to 192.168.1.1, restarted the PC but still no internet connection. So guys, it's over to you as I'm stuck!! 1. Why wouldn't the PC obtain it's IP dynamically from the router as all the others hadn't? 2. How the heck can this PC get access to the net through the router as the other PCs do? I do recall in the dim and distant past having to edit one or more of the .ini files, but I'm not sure! Regards John > I visited a client today with a network of 4 PCs... <snip> > The system was working just fine until my visit today!!! > My brief was to install a new DSLModem/Wireless/Router and add a new > notebook PC to the LAN wirelessly and enable internet connection to > it. > I removed the old hub and USB modem from the 1st PC. I then > reconfigured the Network cards of 1st, 2nd & 3rd PCs to obtain their > IP addresses dynamically from the new router. And you disabled ICS. I am just checking, here; there is no need for it now. > I installed the new 3Com DSLModem/Wireless/Router using it's default > IP 192.168.1.1. In short, PCs 1, 2 & 3 were returned to full > functionality enjoying the internet connection and shares etc etc. > I then restarted the 4th PC expecting it to have a new IP in the > 192.168.1.* range. After restarting I used the IPCONFIG command from a > DOS window which showed the IP address to be the old 192.168.0.84. I > tried to PING the router at 192.168.1.1 and it failed! You didn't try the "Release All/Renew All" while you had ICS running. Pity. It probably would have worked. > I restarted the PC again but still it had the IP address 192.168.0.1. > Pinging the router again failed! I then fixed the IP address at > 192.168.1.84, restarted the PC and this time I was able to PING the > router however. I could not get an internet connection. I am confused, now. The first three computers had fixed IP addresses, but the last was dynamic? I think you have it backwards. As I recall, from running ICS about 3-1/2 years ago, it assigned IP addresses dynamically, starting with the first free LAN IP address after the base LAN IP address. The first computer had the base IP address, the 2nd and 3rd computers got the next sequential IP addresses, '2', and '3', respectively. The 4th computer would have gotten '4', had it gotten an IP address dynamically. It must have been fixed a '84', for some reason. > I treid setting the Gateway to 192.168.1.1, restarted the PC but still > no internet connection. In Network Properties for the fourth computer, where you put a fixed IP address on the TCP/IP Properties, you also use set the "Gateway" tab for the router IP address, you made sure that the WINS Configuration tab was set to disable WINS Configuration, and and WINS DHCP, ***AND*** you went to the DNS Configuration tab and manually added the ISPs DNS servers, didn't you? > So guys, it's over to you as I'm stuck!! > > 1. Why wouldn't the PC obtain it's IP dynamically from the router as > all the others hadn't? That question doesn't make any sense; but I'll bet it should have been, "Why didn't the 4th PC obtain its IP address dynamically from the router as all the others had?" If I am right in my guess that your description was backward, the first three computers were set to obtain an IP address automatically, but the fourth one was not. That would explain what you described. > 2. How the heck can this PC get access to the net through the router > as the other PCs do? One of two things. If there is no need for a static assignment, check the following tabs for the TCP/IP Properties of that computer: DNS Configuraton: Disable DNS Gateway: No entries. Empty. WINS Configuration (I've seen this set wrong, so check it): Disable WINS Resolution IP Address: Obtain an IP address automatically. Before you reboot the computer, use IPCONFIG to release the IP address lease, if it will let you. (I don't know if it will, when you set it statically, as you did, but it won't hurt to try.) After it reboots, it should work as the other computers do. If it needs static IP address assignment, the tabs should be: DNS Configuration: ISP DNS Server NO.1 ISP DNS Server NO.2 ISP DNS Server No.3 (if applicable; most ISPs don't have three, but some do.) Gateway: 192.168.1.1 WINS Resolution: Disable WINS Resolution IP Address: 192.168.1.84 > I do recall in the dim and distant past having to edit one or more of > the .ini files, but I'm not sure! Things from the dim and distant past are often best forgotten. One other thing that confused me; in the part that I snipped, you said: "2nd PC: A SERVER PC running windows 98SE and fixed IP 192.168.0.2" A server in what sense? There may also be an issue here, if this is not set up properly.  SignatureNorman ~Win dain a lotica, En vai tu ri, Si lo ta ~Fin dein a loluca, En dragu a sei lain ~Vi fa-ru les shutai am, En riga-lint Thanks very much for the reply. >You didn't try the "Release All/Renew All" while you had ICS running. Pity. >It probably would have worke No, I didn't do this. I was up against time in the end and as it's not a critical issue I'm returning tomorrow to finish off. >I am confused, now. The first three computers had fixed IP addresses, but >the last was dynamic? I think you have it backwards. As I recall, from [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >computer would have gotten '4', had it gotten an IP address dynamically. It >must have been fixed a '84', for some reason. The first 3 PCs did have fixed IPs. It was the last PC that was set to dynamically obtain it's IP from the'old' ICS server. Where it got 192.168.0.84 from I don't know. I'm guessing someone had previously set it as a fixed one and subsequently changing to dynamic kept the same address. This is just my assumption. The 4th PC failed to obtain it's IP dynamically as expected. >In Network Properties for the fourth computer, where you put a fixed IP >address on the TCP/IP Properties, you also use set the "Gateway" tab for the >router IP address, you made sure that the WINS Configuration tab was set to >disable WINS Configuration, and and WINS DHCP, ***AND*** you went to the DNS >Configuration tab and manually added the ISPs DNS servers, didn't you? I did indeed :)) >That question doesn't make any sense; but I'll bet it should have been, "Why >didn't the 4th PC obtain its IP address dynamically from the router as all >the others had?" If I am right in my guess that your description was >backward, the first three computers were set to obtain an IP address >automatically, but the fourth one was not. That would explain what you >described. I'm afraid it doesn't! A logical explanation but doesn't apply in this case I'm afraid! >One of two things. If there is no need for a static assignment, check the >following tabs for the TCP/IP Properties of that computer: > >DNS Configuraton: >Disable DNS Did that >Gateway: >No entries. Empty. Did that too! >WINS Configuration (I've seen this set wrong, so check it): >Disable WINS Resolution Yup, that too >IP Address: >Obtain an IP address automatically. and that. >> I do recall in the dim and distant past having to edit one or more of >> the .ini files, but I'm not sure! I think it was the protocol.ini file or maybe the protocol section within one of the other .ini files! Had to delete network entries or something similar >Things from the dim and distant past are often best forgotten. At my age, these things get forgotten forever. >One other thing that confused me; in the part that I snipped, you said: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >A server in what sense? There may also be an issue here, if this is not set >up properly. When I sent the original post, I knew I shouldn't have used the word Server - it just happened to be the name of the PC. This is a bog standard peer-to-peer LAN - Sorry about that. Thanks once more for your time in replying. Regards John >> I visited a client today with a network of 4 PCs... ><snip> [quoted text clipped - 110 lines] >A server in what sense? There may also be an issue here, if this is not set >up properly. > >You didn't try the "Release All/Renew All" while you had ICS running. Pity. > >It probably would have worke > No, I didn't do this. I was up against time in the end and as it's not > a critical issue I'm returning tomorrow to finish off. It takes so little time it is something to think about on your next service call. Worst case, the utility hangs while looking for data; you just kill the process then. > >I am confused, now. The first three computers had fixed IP addresses, but > >the last was dynamic? I think you have it backwards. As I recall, from [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >computer would have gotten '4', had it gotten an IP address dynamically. It > >must have been fixed a '84', for some reason. > The first 3 PCs did have fixed IPs. It was the last PC that was set to > dynamically obtain it's IP from the'old' ICS server. Where it got > 192.168.0.84 from I don't know. I'm guessing someone had previously > set it as a fixed one and subsequently changing to dynamic kept the > same address. This is just my assumption. > The 4th PC failed to obtain it's IP dynamically as expected. Hmmm. Unless ICS has changed, I would guess that the first three PCs were originally dynamic, and changed to static; the last originally static, and changed to dynamic. > >In Network Properties for the fourth computer, where you put a fixed IP > >address on the TCP/IP Properties, you also use set the "Gateway" tab for the > >router IP address, you made sure that the WINS Configuration tab was set to > >disable WINS Configuration, and and WINS DHCP, ***AND*** you went to the DNS > >Configuration tab and manually added the ISPs DNS servers, didn't you? > I did indeed :)) Okay... > >That question doesn't make any sense; but I'll bet it should have been, "Why > >didn't the 4th PC obtain its IP address dynamically from the router as all > >the others had?" If I am right in my guess that your description was > >backward, the first three computers were set to obtain an IP address > >automatically, but the fourth one was not. That would explain what you > >described. > I'm afraid it doesn't! A logical explanation but doesn't apply in this > case I'm afraid! With computers, there is always a logical explanation. Sometimes it just escapes me because I didn't design the operating software; so I am sometimes caught off guard by my habit of making unwarranted assumptions. > >One of two things. If there is no need for a static assignment, check the > >following tabs for the TCP/IP Properties of that computer: > >DNS Configuraton: > >Disable DNS > Did that > >Gateway: > >No entries. Empty. > Did that too! > >WINS Configuration (I've seen this set wrong, so check it): > >Disable WINS Resolution > Yup, that too > >IP Address: > >Obtain an IP address automatically. > and that. And then what about the "Release All" to clear the lease? > >> I do recall in the dim and distant past having to edit one or more of > >> the .ini files, but I'm not sure! > I think it was the protocol.ini file or maybe the protocol section > within one of the other .ini files! Had to delete network entries or > something similar I have never had to edit a .ini file for TCP/IP. I did some .ini file editing, and a couple of others, for IPX/SPX with Novell Personal Netware; but that peer-to-peer LAN is pretty much unsupported history since Windows 95 got "networking religion". > >Things from the dim and distant past are often best forgotten. > At my age, these things get forgotten forever. No. Just too much stuff in the brain, and the indexing system fails. > >One other thing that confused me; in the part that I snipped, you said: > >"2nd PC: > >A SERVER PC running windows 98SE and fixed IP 192.168.0.2" > >A server in what sense? There may also be an issue here, if this is not set > >up properly. > When I sent the original post, I knew I shouldn't have used the word > Server - it just happened to be the name of the PC. Okay. Just be consistent in the future; include all of the computers' names, or none of them > This is a bog standard peer-to-peer LAN - Sorry about that. Then there is something that I have overlooked. I have never failed to get a LAN running, and I have done some strange things that would make an MCSE, or the like, wince. I have torn down and built up my LAN so many times I should probably submit a resume to a tech company. > Thanks once more for your time in replying. Just trying to help; it seemed like I could apply some of what I have learned. I still feel like I have overlooked something way too obvious, though... SignatureNorman ~Win dain a lotica, En vai tu ri, Si lo ta ~Fin dein a loluca, En dragu a sei lain ~Vi fa-ru les shutai am, En riga-lint Just an update and conclusion for you (I hate stories without endings)! On my 2nd visit I first thing I tried was a release all - yup, it hung the computer. Anyway, to cut a long story short, this is what I did. I removed the network card from the computer. Restarted the PC and shutdown again. Reinserted the card and updated drivers. Did a release_all, restarted the PC once again and hey presto! The rest is history - it all worked. I tend to remember these little incidents for the future - a bit like the university of life! Thanks for the help, I might post here again. Regards John > Just an update and conclusion for you (I hate stories without > endings)! > On my 2nd visit I first thing I tried was a release all - yup, it hung > the computer. Hmmm. I've only experienced that hanging the process; the computer was still responsive, and I could kill the hung process from the task manager. Oh, well. > Anyway, to cut a long story short, this is what I did. > I removed the network card from the computer. Restarted the PC and > shutdown again. Reinserted the card and updated drivers. Did a > release_all, restarted the PC once again and hey presto! Hmmm. Maybe the next time you run into this you should try just removing the adapter 'virtually'. I think you can tell Windows to remove a device from Device Manager, and it will then unload the drivers. The next time you reboot, it will do the same thing; locate the drives for the "newly discovered hardware". Worst case, you have to open the case anyway. > The rest is history - it all worked. > I tend to remember these little incidents for the future - a bit like > the university of life! > Thanks for the help, I might post here again. Any time. At the least, if I can't actually offer a solution, I do get people to thinking along different lines. And not just I; these are just groups of users; peers, if you will, sharing ideas and experiences. No MSFT paid staff hangs out here as a part of the job (though I am sure they do hang out here "off the clock"). SignatureNorman ~Win dain a lotica, En vai tu ri, Si lo ta ~Fin dein a loluca, En dragu a sei lain ~Vi fa-ru les shutai am, En riga-lint |
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.