Resolved Ethernet madness - make it stop

[Cassady]

Ok. I'm writing this on my iPhone using cellular, since now I have errors jumping up....

Looking at the list of devices in the Router, they are starting to be switched over to DHCP, as opposed to static.

The one thing that is confusing me - one of the devices listed, is a 'MiniUPnPD' - this is the Ethernet cable from the antenna (I presume), since it only appeared on the scene AFTER I switched to WISP. It's IP address is 192.168.0.254... Is that to be expected?

 

[Cassady]

The plot thickens - clicking on that IP link inside the Router, takes me to an AirOS login page - so that's my interface!

Why is it running on 192.168.0.x though? That has confused me, since as I understood things - that should be running on 192.168.1.x??

 

[jpietrzak8]

The one thing that is confusing me - one of the devices listed, is a 'MiniUPnPD' - this is the Ethernet cable from the antenna (I presume), since it only appeared on the scene AFTER I switched to WISP. It's IP address is 192.168.0.254... Is that to be expected?

Ah, I believe the DSL-N55U has a couple of USB ports on the back, which you can use to plug in things like hard drives or printers. The common protocol these days for connecting to such things is "Universal Plug and Play", or "UPnP". I think MiniUPnPD is an open-source program that provides a mapping between a network-aware device (such as a router) and a UPnP device. So, that is probably what the router would be using if you plug in a USB device to it...
[doublepost=1484498508][/doublepost]

The plot thickens - clicking on that IP link inside the Router, takes me to an AirOS login page - so that's my interface!

Why is it running on 192.168.0.x though? That has confused me, since as I understood things - that should be running on 192.168.1.x??

Oh! Yeah, that is interesting. Odd. Gotta think about this one...

 

[Cassady]

Yip. Tried my luck with the dr default password (in airOS manual), but no luck. My user account details also don't work - probably set by the ISP, and they dont want end-users going in.

But two things stand out - nothing is working now that I switched DHCP on. None of my devices can connect - can still get into the Router setup though.

Secondly, I think I had mistakenly set my things up in the OSX Server, to connect directly to the Ubiquiti in (at 192.168.0.254)... Which possibly explains things...

 

[jpietrzak8]

I've just browsed through the DSL-N55U's manual again; I think that "MiniUPnPD" device should only show up if you've got "Media Server" enabled in the router. You might try disabling it, and see what happens.

Also, do you have anything plugged into the DSL-N55U's USB ports?

You really should not be able to directly reach the Ubiquity through a 192.168.0.x connection. Something doesn't make sense there...
[doublepost=1484499628][/doublepost]

But two things stand out - nothing is working now that I switched DHCP on. None of my devices can connect - can still get into the Router setup though.

You can get into Router setup? Let me take another look at the manual...

Hmm, so that would mean that DHCP is working, but the DSL-N55U is now not connecting properly to the Ubiquity. Hmm.

 

[Cassady]

I've just browsed through the DSL-N55U's manual again; I think that "MiniUPnPD" device should only show up if you've got "Media Server" enabled in the router. You might try disabling it, and see what happens.

Also, do you have anything plugged into the DSL-N55U's USB ports?

You really should not be able to directly reach the Ubiquity through a 192.168.0.x connection. Something doesn't make sense there...

Nothing plugged in. Only two Ethernet cables into the LANs, one from the antenna, and the other to the Mini.

I don't know how - but as mentioned, I am sure that is the Ubiquiti point. As mentioned, it showed up after the switch to WISP, and has always been there since. And when clicking on it, it takes me directly to the airOS login page in the browser window (as a new tab).

 

[jpietrzak8]

Nothing plugged in. Only two Ethernet cables into the LANs, one from the antenna, and the other to the Mini.

Cool, simple! (Just to be absolutely certain, though -- the Ubiquity is plugged into the WAN port on the far left of the back of the router, and the Mini is plugged into one of the four LAN ports on the right?)

I don't know how - but as mentioned, I am sure that is the Ubiquiti point. As mentioned, it showed up after the switch to WISP, and has always been there since. And when clicking on it, it takes me directly to the airOS login page in the browser window (as a new tab).

This just doesn't sound right. When you click on the link (on the Mac, right?), does the address bar at the top show that you are going to 192.168.0.254, or 192.168.1.1?

Again, maybe you could try disabling "Media Server" and see if that changes anything...

 

[Cassady]

Looking at the list of devices in the Router settings, most have now switched to DHCP. Those that are still listed as "static" are working, all those on DHCP are not connecting to the web.

 

[jpietrzak8]

Looking at the list of devices in the Router settings, most have now switched to DHCP. Those that are still listed as "static" are working, all those on DHCP are not connecting to the web.

Ah, when you say those on DHCP are "not connecting to the web", are they giving the error message "network not available", or the message "resolving network address"? It could just be that the DHCP server doesn't have the correct DNS address.

 

[Cassady]

Cool, simple! (Just to be absolutely certain, though -- the Ubiquity is plugged into the WAN port on the far left of the back of the router, and the Mini is plugged into one of the four LAN ports on the right?)



This just doesn't sound right. When you click on the link (on the Mac, right?), does the address bar at the top show that you are going to 192.168.0.254, or 192.168.1.1?

Again, maybe you could try disabling "Media Server" and see if that changes anything...

I don't have a Ethernet WAN port, since it's a DSL router - so only has a WAN that accepts a phone line. The antenna Ethernet has always (since switching to WISP) been plugged in to one of the LAN ports, as I was asked to do by the ISP. So have three remaining LANs left, one of which is where I am attaching the Mini to (or at least, trying to).

I don't think I ever had the media server or whatever activated. And certainly not since switching to WISP - and when I installed the latest firmware about 2 months back, had to factory reset the router - so any of that would have been wiped in any event...

The UPnPD is listed in the Connected Devices list - which also shows the IP addresses of all the devices, and whether or not they are static or DHCP. Clicking on its link, in the Router setup on my MacMini, opens the airOS login page in a new tab in Safari, with the 192.168.0.254...

I appreciate the help. This stuff is *tricky*!!

Edit:

So maybe I'm wrong thinking that the antenna is working on 192.168.1.x? Could it not be running from 192.168.0.254, and turning DHCP off, would simply have seen my existing devices and their IPs fixed as static, but in 192.168.0.x as opposed to the prior 192.168.1.x ?? Is that possible?

 

[Cassady]

Ah, when you say those on DHCP are "not connecting to the web", are they giving the error message "network not available", or the message "resolving network address"? It could just be that the DHCP server doesn't have the correct DNS address.

It flashes up the message I used to see when my ADSL line was down - "You failed to access the web page that you want to. Reason for failed connection: The telephone cable or Ethernet cable is not plugged in". It was always the same message though, even when on ADSL and the line was down, but all was still plugged in.

Edit:

Just to close that loop - in the Router setup, an alternative view is to check the Connected Devices through an "By Interface" view. When I do, they are sorted accordingly. Top of the list, is the 'MiniUPnPD', and it is described as 'Wired Internet', with that IP address and a MAC address.

ATV4 and cable WiFi device are under 2.4g, GHz, and the rest under 5 GHz.

 

[jpietrzak8]

I don't have a Ethernet WAN port, since it's a DSL router - so only has a WAN that accepts a phone line.

Ah! I was wondering about that -- it seemed odd that a WISP was using the DSL protocol.

(Can I ask, why you chose to repurpose a DSL modem for this task? It'd probably be a whole lot easier to go with a generic router. A router that understands which connection is the WAN and which connection is the LAN can usually set everything up natively by itself... )

Ok, so yeah, the WISP guys might actually have wanted to set up your router as a "dumb bridge" then. If that were possible to do, you could just plug everything into the DSL-N55U, have it pass packets around, and let the Ubiquity take care of all the actual routing and DHCP stuff.

I'm not entirely sure how you'd do that, though. The DSL router is built to work around a DSL connection. The manual I'm looking at just assumes that you're going to be connected to DSL. I don't see any controls to manage the non-DSL portion of the router as a simple bridge. It could be that it does that by default, I suppose...

I don't think I ever had the media server or whatever activated.

The manual I'm looking at seems to indicate that it is turned on by default...

So maybe I'm wrong thinking that the antenna is working on 192.168.1.x? Could it not be running from 192.168.0.254, and turning DHCP off, would simply have seen my existing devices and their IPs fixed as static, but in 192.168.0.x as opposed to the prior 192.168.1.x ?? Is that possible?

Good question. I'm not sure exactly what the DSL router is thinking, if it is setting up its own LAN to be on the 192.168.0.x network, but one of the clients plugged into the LAN ports is passing packets on the 192.168.1.x network. Maybe it automatically tries to route those packets to the 192.168.0.x network? Maybe it passes them around verbatim, as if it were a bridge?

I dunno. It is just a little weird using a DSL modem for this purpose...

 

[Cassady]

Ah! I was wondering about that -- it seemed odd that a WISP was using the DSL protocol.

(Can I ask, why you chose to repurpose a DSL modem for this task? It'd probably be a whole lot easier to go with a generic router. A router that understands which connection is the WAN and which connection is the LAN can usually set everything up natively by itself... )

Ok, so yeah, the WISP guys might actually have wanted to set up your router as a "dumb bridge" then. If that were possible to do, you could just plug everything into the DSL-N55U, have it pass packets around, and let the Ubiquity take care of all the actual routing and DHCP stuff.

I'm not entirely sure how you'd do that, though. The DSL router is built to work around a DSL connection. The manual I'm looking at just assumes that you're going to be connected to DSL. I don't see any controls to manage the non-DSL portion of the router as a simple bridge. It could be that it does that by default, I suppose...



The manual I'm looking at seems to indicate that it is turned on by default...



Good question. I'm not sure exactly what the DSL router is thinking, if it is setting up its own LAN to be on the 192.168.0.x network, but one of the clients plugged into the LAN ports is passing packets on the 192.168.1.x network. Maybe it automatically tries to route those packets to the 192.168.0.x network? Maybe it passes them around verbatim, as if it were a bridge?

I dunno. It is just a little weird using a DSL modem for this purpose...

Thanks. Will look around again for the media server switch in the setup, and see if I can find it.

I gathered that using this old 2011 router is not ideal - I know they model after this one allows for bridge mode to be triggered. This one does not, at least not that I can see.

But the ISP never suggested I need to upgrade. Might have to consider that. But I cannot help thinking I am missing something obvious...

Sigh. Guess I will have to switch DHCP back off, and start again. Thanks regardless.

 

[jpietrzak8]

Reason for failed connection: The telephone cable or Ethernet cable is not plugged in".

Ok, that error message simply means that it can't set up a connection to the network. Hmm.

So, the wifi mechanism on the DSL is somehow figuring out that it needs to pipe packets to the Ubiquity antenna, but it is having trouble moving packets between two devices both plugged into the LAN ports. I wish I could determine how to fix that, but the manual I'm looking at doesn't provide much more info.
[doublepost=1484503536][/doublepost]

But the ISP never suggested I need to upgrade. Might have to consider that. But I cannot help thinking I am missing something obvious...

Well, not so much "upgrade", as to get an entirely different device. This is like eating soup with a fork instead of a spoon; you can do it, but it isn't the easiest way to do things. With a normal router, you'd just plug the Ubiquity into the "WAN" port, plug the Mac into one of the "LAN" ports, and everything would automagically work. With this device, you pretty much have to trick it into doing something it was never designed to do...

 

[Cassady]

Ok, that error message simply means that it can't set up a connection to the network. Hmm.

So, the wifi mechanism on the DSL is somehow figuring out that it needs to pipe packets to the Ubiquity antenna, but it is having trouble moving packets between two devices both plugged into the LAN ports. I wish I could determine how to fix that, but the manual I'm looking at doesn't provide much more info.
[doublepost=1484503536][/doublepost]

Well, not so much "upgrade", as to get an entirely different device. This is like eating soup with a fork instead of a spoon; you can do it, but it isn't the easiest way to do things. With a normal router, you'd just plug the Ubiquity into the "WAN" port, plug the Mac into one of the "LAN" ports, and everything would automagically work. With this device, you pretty much have to trick it into doing something it was never designed to do...

The manual is pretty outdated. Since the firmware update, the UI looks basically like this: http://event.asus.com/2012/nw/dummy_ui/EN/index.html

Only minor differences between mine and that.

DHCP is back off, and all working again.

 

[jpietrzak8]

DHCP is back off, and all working again.

Good to hear!

Here's a question: I'm guessing that on that "Network Map" screen, it should show something like "Internet Status: Not Connected", right? Or, even if it is connected, it should not show anything for the "WAN IP:" field. If it does, then the software is quite a bit smarter than I'd thought, and has somehow realized that one of the devices connected to the LAN ports is actually the mechanism to connect to the internet...

 

[Cassady]

Good to hear!

Here's a question: I'm guessing that on that "Network Map" screen, it should show something like "Internet Status: Not Connected", right? Or, even if it is connected, it should not show anything for the "WAN IP:" field. If it does, then the software is quite a bit smarter than I'd thought, and has somehow realized that one of the devices connected to the LAN ports is actually the mechanism to connect to the internet...

Yip. It's *really* annoying. When on ADSL, that used to be the quickest indicator of problems. Now it's just always "disconnected", but obviously it's not, with it being connected to the web through the LAN.

 

[Cassady]

Any suggestions about whereto from here?

Possibly look closely at my Server settings?

The thing that is sticking in the back of my head though, is that I'm pretty sure I had issues when trying to connect via Ethernet before - even with my MBP, and that was before I started doing any tinkering with the Server software.

But might be worth asking a few questions over at the Server sub-forum?

 

[jpietrzak8]

Yip. It's *really* annoying. When on ADSL, that used to be the quickest indicator of problems. Now it's just always "disconnected", but obviously it's not, with it being connected to the web through the LAN.

Well, but that's the thing; from the DSL modem's point of view, you *are* disconnected from the internet. What you're basically trying to do is to go behind the DSL modem's back, and have it pass packets around without telling it that it is actually connected to the net. This can be a fun project for someone wanting to learn the ins and outs of IP networks and of how the DSL modem's software was designed, but it really isn't the way to go if you want an easy and reliable network connection.
[doublepost=1484505538][/doublepost]

Any suggestions about whereto from here?

The key to all of this is to figure out what the DSL thinks is going on. My own guess, at the moment, is that it was treating the LAN ports and the Wifi hardware as being on different networks, and therefore was routing between the two. And, therefore, it failed to route between two different machines both connected to the LAN ports at the same time.

The next question to ask, then, is whether the router is even capable of treating different LAN ports as being on different networks. My guess would be that it can, but I'm not sure the UI would even provide that functionality to you. If so, it might be easier to try to turn off all routing functionality on the DSL modem, and cross your fingers. If you just switch DHCP off, place the WIFI on the 192.168.1.x network, and set the Mini and the ATV to DHCP (and tell them the gateway address is 192.168.1.1), you might be able to get the DSL modem to work as a pure bridge through both LAN and Wifi... Maybe.

 

[Cassady]

Well, but that's the thing; from the DSL modem's point of view, you *are* disconnected from the internet. What you're basically trying to do is to go behind the DSL modem's back, and have it pass packets around without telling it that it is actually connected to the net. This can be a fun project for someone wanting to learn the ins and outs of IP networks and of how the DSL modem's software was designed, but it really isn't the way to go if you want an easy and reliable network connection.
[doublepost=1484505538][/doublepost]

The key to all of this is to figure out what the DSL thinks is going on. My own guess, at the moment, is that it was treating the LAN ports and the Wifi hardware as being on different networks, and therefore was routing between the two. And, therefore, it failed to route between two different machines both connected to the LAN ports at the same time.

The next question to ask, then, is whether the router is even capable of treating different LAN ports as being on different networks. My guess would be that it can, but I'm not sure the UI would even provide that functionality to you. If so, it might be easier to try to turn off all routing functionality on the DSL modem, and cross your fingers. If you just switch DHCP off, place the WIFI on the 192.168.1.x network, and set the Mini and the ATV to DHCP (and tell them the gateway address is 192.168.1.1), you might be able to get the DSL modem to work as a pure bridge through both LAN and Wifi... Maybe.

I appreciate the suggestions. At this point - I'm tempted to just throw a bit of money at it.

Looking at [[ this ]] now, at least this seems to have an ethernet WAN port, and will hopefully make things simpler.

With internal antenna, it's range might not be as good - but assuming it sorts out my connecting via ethernet issues, that will be fine - since then I can jump in with the Ubiquiti Unifi APs...

 

[jpietrzak8]

I appreciate the suggestions. At this point - I'm tempted to just throw a bit of money at it.

That would certainly make life a lot easier.

Looking at [[ this ]] now, at least this seems to have an ethernet WAN port, and will hopefully make things simpler.

Yup, a standard ethernet router is the way to go. There are lots and lots of options out there, but that one does seem to be up to date with all the latest network standards. I don't think you can go wrong with it.

 

[organicCPU]

Did you do correct IPv4 subnetting, especially on the routers? For most small nets 255.255.255.0 is set as default, but for your setup something like 255.255.0.0 seems to make more sense. Also consider the IPv6 subnetting.
Another thing to check is what your ISP writes about your local configuration. Some ISPs give you just a restricted range of IP addresses that you are allowed to set on your LAN.

 

[jpietrzak8]

Did you do correct IPv4 subnetting, especially on the routers? For most small nets 255.255.255.0 is set as default, but for your setup something like 255.255.0.0 seems to make more sense.

Er, why? His 192.168.1.x network should (in theory) contain exactly two devices, and the 192.168.0.x network only a handful. There's no need for him to support more than 255 devices on either network.

Also consider the IPv6 subnetting.

While his WISP provider may be moving to IPv6, both the Ubiquity antenna router and the DSL modem are presenting IPv4 connectivity to their clients. Hopefully, he doesn't need to mess with IPv6 at all.

Another thing to check is what your ISP writes about your local configuration. Some ISPs give you just a restricted range of IP addresses that you are allowed to set on your LAN.

Indeed, in the quote he provided a few posts up, his ISP has noted that it provides a dynamic IP address to its clients. However, all that is hidden within the Ubiquity router, whose settings are not made accessible to its clients. As such, I don't think he really needs to worry about that...


EDIT: Ah, yeah, let me amend my remarks. Yeah, if both the 192.168.1.x packets and the 192.168.0.x packets are getting commingled together inside the DSL modem, then yeah, I guess he would need to set up a more permissive subnet. Just another complication of trying to use that DSL modem in an unconventional manner...

 

[organicCPU]

Er, why? His 192.168.1.x network should (in theory) contain exactly two devices, and the 192.168.0.x network only a handful.

I don't see the reason why not run just one single network in this case. Besides, I never did such a 192.168.x.x net. It was just an idea to use 255.255.0.0. Not because of the number of devices, but because of the CIDR block. Theoretically 255.255.254.0 would also fit the +0.0.1.255 difference. But I'm not a network professional, so just a guess.

Hopefully, he doesn't need to mess with IPv6 at all.

Hopefully yes.

Indeed, in the quote he provided a few posts up, his ISP has noted that it provides a dynamic IP address to its clients. However, all that is hidden within the Ubiquity router, whose settings are not made accessible to its clients. As such, I don't think he really needs to worry about that...

I had the case where an ISP didn't want local IP addressing with 192.168.1.x. It took me quite a while to find out, that the ISP only allowed 192.168.8.x and above for whatever reason. So just another idea to have a look at.

 

[Cassady]

Appreciate the suggestions. I have emailed the ISP, and requested login codes for the airOs interface. Doubt they will give me access, but thought I would try my luck.

I am on the verge of ordering a new router with a dedicated ethernet "in"/WAN, and will pop something up here as soon as it arrives, and I have installed it. REALLY hopeful that the cause of all these issues lies with the old router!

Thanks again for all the help!