On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 23:57:33 +0100, Jesper Kaas <jesperk@neitakk.online.no>
wrote:

>On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 14:05:18 -0600, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>>When you see a message like, "No Internet access", that's not very helpful for
>>troubleshooting and determining a root cause. Most people have no issues with
>>their LAN setup, and those people won't need to care about their subnet,
>>netmask, default gateway, DNS entries, etc. But since you're having some
>>problems, you might need to take some notes so that you can compare a working
>>connection to a non-working connection.

>When you talk about subnet parameters do you mean, as you write above,
>netmask, gateway and eventually DNS-servers?

Yes, that kind of info.

>The main net has netmask
>255.255.255.0, gateway 10.0.0.138, DNS 208.67.222.222 and
>208.67.220.220. The subnet the extender has when set to On or Auto is
>not possible to see, you can just see that the ip's it hands out are
>in the same form as for the main net.

I would venture to guess that your extender has a web server running, which you
could access with a web browser. The web address would be its LAN IP address. If
port 80 doesn't work, try https on port 443. You should be able to log in to
make various configuration changes.

You'll want to make sure that DHCP is set to Off, for starters. Next, I would
set its LAN IP address to something like 10.0.0.2. I would change the main
gateway router to 10.0.0.1. Both of those IP addresses are well outside of the
DHCP scope. You could leave the netmask at 255.255.255.0, if you like.

If you can't stop your extender from creating a new subnet, you'll have to
remove it and put it on a shelf somewhere. Two subnets, especially two subnets
with conflicting IP addresses, are a recipe for disaster.

On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 23:21:58 +0100, Jesper Kaas <jesperk@neitakk.online.no>
wrote:

>The main net has gateway 10.0.0.138, the mask is 255.255.255.0. The
>DHCP-pool is 10.0.0.20-10.0.0.199.

Ouch, as Carlos pointed out, that's going to be an issue. The gateway is smack
dab in the middle of the DHCP pool. As I mentioned in another post, I'd change
the gateway IP to something like 10.0.0.1. You can keep the 255.255.255.0
netmask.

When you change the IP address of the gateway, everything will lose Internet
access. You can re-enable all of the DHCP PCs and devices by rebooting them.
Anything with a static IP will need to be manually updated to reflect the new
gateway IP.

On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 21:16:14 -0600, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid>
wrote:

>On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 23:21:58 +0100, Jesper Kaas <jesperk@neitakk.online.no>
>wrote:
>
>>The main net has gateway 10.0.0.138, the mask is 255.255.255.0. The
>>DHCP-pool is 10.0.0.20-10.0.0.199.
>
>Ouch, as Carlos pointed out, that's going to be an issue. The gateway is smack
>dab in the middle of the DHCP pool. As I mentioned in another post, I'd change
>the gateway IP to something like 10.0.0.1. You can keep the 255.255.255.0
>netmask.
>
>When you change the IP address of the gateway, everything will lose Internet
>access. You can re-enable all of the DHCP PCs and devices by rebooting them.
>Anything with a static IP will need to be manually updated to reflect the new
>gateway IP.

Bingo!
I changed the address of the router to 10.0.0.1, and changed the
gateway to 10.0.0.1 on the only device I have set to static IP, which
is the PC I am working on now. Restarted the PC, and things are
running fine for some minutes now. Super!

Thanks a lot to you patient helpers. You are really great. Time will
tell if the extender now wil stop being evil.

PS: Back in the olden days at work I once a list of ip-adresses to
set for a new appliance in the lab. On one PC i used something like
160.53.47.2. The IT-department complained, saying it was best to not
use the first 4 adresses in a range. So I changed the 160.53.47.2 to
160.53.47.5. I had used 2 as I knew that the first 2 numbers are
reserved.
Any comments on this?

Best regards, and again thanks a lot for the help.
--
Jesper Kaas - jesperk@neindanke.online.no

On 2023-11-30 08:47, Jesper Kaas wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 21:16:14 -0600, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 23:21:58 +0100, Jesper Kaas <jesperk@neitakk.online.no>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The main net has gateway 10.0.0.138, the mask is 255.255.255.0. The
>>> DHCP-pool is 10.0.0.20-10.0.0.199.
>>
>> Ouch, as Carlos pointed out, that's going to be an issue. The gateway is smack
>> dab in the middle of the DHCP pool. As I mentioned in another post, I'd change
>> the gateway IP to something like 10.0.0.1. You can keep the 255.255.255.0
>> netmask.
>>
>> When you change the IP address of the gateway, everything will lose Internet
>> access. You can re-enable all of the DHCP PCs and devices by rebooting them.
>> Anything with a static IP will need to be manually updated to reflect the new
>> gateway IP.
>
> Bingo!
> I changed the address of the router to 10.0.0.1, and changed the
> gateway to 10.0.0.1 on the only device I have set to static IP, which
> is the PC I am working on now. Restarted the PC, and things are
> running fine for some minutes now. Super!
>
> Thanks a lot to you patient helpers. You are really great. Time will
> tell if the extender now wil stop being evil.
>
> PS: Back in the olden days at work I once a list of ip-adresses to
> set for a new appliance in the lab. On one PC i used something like
> 160.53.47.2. The IT-department complained, saying it was best to not
> use the first 4 adresses in a range. So I changed the 160.53.47.2 to
> 160.53.47.5. I had used 2 as I knew that the first 2 numbers are
> reserved.
> Any comments on this?

That's just some internal policy.

The only addresses reserved by protocol are the first and the last (0
and 255, usually). Network and broadcast addresses.

Some places use the first or the last usable address (1 or 254) for the
router. Then they can reserve some range for fixed machines, like a printer.

Most typically, they will use DHCP for everything, and thus organize the
IPs at a central machine with just a text editor.

>
> Best regards, and again thanks a lot for the help.

Welcome.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 2023-11-29 21:05, Char Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 12:22:28 +0100, Jesper Kaas <kaasjesper0@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 29.11.2023 03:33, Char Jackson wrote:
>>> On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 22:26:39 +0100, Jesper Kaas <jesperk@neitakk.online.no>
>>> wrote:

>>> I think you mentioned earlier that you enable both wired and wireless
>>> connections at the same time, which is something that I never do. I'd pick one
>>> and stick with it.
>> Well, I think wired works best for printer and TV, and wi-fi is needed
>> for a lot of things. Phones, charger for car, hifi whatever. Even got a
>> dishwasher with wi-fi, but turned it off after testing :-) Right now the
>> router shows around 10 things connected via wi-fi.
>
> At the router, definitely enable both wired and wireless if you need to. I only
> meant at the various PCs and other devices on your LAN. Pick a connection type
> and disable the others, is my advice. Windows won't try to use two connection
> types simultaneously, but I still wouldn't leave both enabled, especially if
> you're trying to troubleshoot something.

Two connections should just work™ :-)

On Linux, for instance, if they are on DHCP they work automatically. The
WiFi side gets more "weight"; the kernel just uses the one with the
shorter or lighter route, which should be the Ethernet.

The error and problem arises with manually configuring both on the same
address.

Windows instead disables one automatically.

But certainly, for troubleshooting, better disable one.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 30.11.2023 15:09, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> PS: Back in the olden days at work I once  a list of ip-adresses to
>> set for a new appliance in the lab. On one PC i used something like
>> 160.53.47.2. The IT-department complained, saying it was best to not
>> use the first 4 adresses in a range. So I changed the 160.53.47.2 to
>> 160.53.47.5. I had used 2 as I knew that the first 2 numbers are
>> reserved.
>> Any comments on this?
>
> That's just some internal policy.
>
> The only addresses reserved by protocol are the first and the last (0
> and 255, usually). Network and broadcast addresses.
>
> Some places use the first or the last usable address (1 or 254) for the
> router. Then they can reserve some range for fixed machines, like a
> printer.
>
> Most typically, they will use DHCP for everything, and thus organize the
> IPs at a central machine with just a text editor.
They use x.x.x.0 or is it x.x.x.1 for gateway. It is strict static ip on
I think everything except PCs/laptops. It's a hospital where security is
a vital issue, and a guess from me would be that there are in the order
of 5 to 10.000 net-connected devices on 3 locations.
For us that have service on the lab instruments and install the smaller
ones (hundreds) the fixed IP's is a unique identifier in tables, and can
be used for access to the webserver most of these devices have.

Best regards

On 30.11.2023 04:10, Char Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 23:57:33 +0100, Jesper Kaas <jesperk@neitakk.online.no>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 14:05:18 -0600, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> When you see a message like, "No Internet access", that's not very helpful for
>>> troubleshooting and determining a root cause. Most people have no issues with
>>> their LAN setup, and those people won't need to care about their subnet,
>>> netmask, default gateway, DNS entries, etc. But since you're having some
>>> problems, you might need to take some notes so that you can compare a working
>>> connection to a non-working connection.
>
>> When you talk about subnet parameters do you mean, as you write above,
>> netmask, gateway and eventually DNS-servers?
>
> Yes, that kind of info.
>
>> The main net has netmask
>> 255.255.255.0, gateway 10.0.0.138, DNS 208.67.222.222 and
>> 208.67.220.220. The subnet the extender has when set to On or Auto is
>> not possible to see, you can just see that the ip's it hands out are
>> in the same form as for the main net.
>
> I would venture to guess that your extender has a web server running, which you
> could access with a web browser. The web address would be its LAN IP address. If
> port 80 doesn't work, try https on port 443. You should be able to log in to
> make various configuration changes.
>
> You'll want to make sure that DHCP is set to Off, for starters. Next, I would
> set its LAN IP address to something like 10.0.0.2. I would change the main
> gateway router to 10.0.0.1. Both of those IP addresses are well outside of the
> DHCP scope. You could leave the netmask at 255.255.255.0, if you like.
>
I set the gateway address for the main router to 10.0.0.1 this morning,
after You and Carlos discovered the possibility of error if the former
gateway address, 1.0.0.138, was handed out as an ip-address for a
connecting device. Is that what you think was the cause for the trouble?
There has been no problems since then.
And yes, the extender has a webserver with more possibillities than the
app Tether gives. Via the web-server access I have set static ip for the
extender to 10.0.0.2. You can also define a pool for the DHCP here, but
I have had the extenders DHCP set to off since testing it yesterday. In
the app you cannot set static ip or define DHCP-pool (but it has other
possibilities that the web interface does not have).

> If you can't stop your extender from creating a new subnet, you'll have to
> remove it and put it on a shelf somewhere. Two subnets, especially two subnets
> with conflicting IP addresses, are a recipe for disaster.
Well, before asking for help here, I was going to send the extender back
to the shop as faulty :-) Thanks to your kind help, I think it is
working as it should. Did some testing with it this afternoon, and all
went smooth.
And I have learnt some new things :-)

Best regards

On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 16:10:51 +0100, Jesper Kaas <kaasjesper0@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 30.11.2023 15:09, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> PS: Back in the olden days at work I once  a list of ip-adresses to
>>> set for a new appliance in the lab. On one PC i used something like
>>> 160.53.47.2. The IT-department complained, saying it was best to not
>>> use the first 4 adresses in a range. So I changed the 160.53.47.2 to
>>> 160.53.47.5. I had used 2 as I knew that the first 2 numbers are
>>> reserved.
>>> Any comments on this?
>>
>> That's just some internal policy.
>>
>> The only addresses reserved by protocol are the first and the last (0
>> and 255, usually). Network and broadcast addresses.
>>
>> Some places use the first or the last usable address (1 or 254) for the
>> router. Then they can reserve some range for fixed machines, like a
>> printer.
>>
>> Most typically, they will use DHCP for everything, and thus organize the
>> IPs at a central machine with just a text editor.
>>
>They use x.x.x.0 or is it x.x.x.1 for gateway.

Within the IPv4 protocol, the lowest possible address (x.x.x.0) refers to the
subnet itself, while the highest possible address (x.x.x.255) is the broadcast
address for that subnet. That leaves the usable range of addresses as x.x.x.1
thru x.x.x.254. There's nothing magical about those addresses, but it's
conventional to assign the static addresses starting at the lower, or sometimes
the upper, end of the range, and then carve out a DHCP pool from what's left.

>It is strict static ip on
>I think everything except PCs/laptops. It's a hospital where security is
>a vital issue, and a guess from me would be that there are in the order
>of 5 to 10.000 net-connected devices on 3 locations.
>For us that have service on the lab instruments and install the smaller
>ones (hundreds) the fixed IP's is a unique identifier in tables, and can
>be used for access to the webserver most of these devices have.

Sounds good.

On 2023-11-30 20:23, Jesper Kaas wrote:
> On 30.11.2023 04:10, Char Jackson wrote:
>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 23:57:33 +0100, Jesper Kaas <jesperk@neitakk.online.no> wrote:

>> I would venture to guess that your extender has a web server
>> running, which you could access with a web browser. The web address
>> would be its LAN IP address. If port 80 doesn't work, try https on
>> port 443. You should be able to log in to make various
>> configuration changes.
>>
>> You'll want to make sure that DHCP is set to Off, for starters.
>> Next, I would set its LAN IP address to something like 10.0.0.2. I
>> would change the main gateway router to 10.0.0.1. Both of those IP
>> addresses are well outside of the DHCP scope. You could leave the
>> netmask at 255.255.255.0, if you like.
>>
> I set the gateway address for the main router to 10.0.0.1 this morning,
> after You and Carlos discovered the possibility of error if the former
> gateway address, 1.0.0.138, was handed out as an ip-address for a
> connecting device. Is that what you think was the cause for the trouble?

It is certainly possible. If the GW address is given to some other
machine by the DHCP server, the entire LAN will crash.

That and the extender dhcp and routing.

> There has been no problems since then.
> And yes, the extender has a webserver with more possibillities than the
> app Tether gives. Via the web-server access I have set static ip for the
> extender to 10.0.0.2. You can also define a pool for the DHCP here, but
> I have had the extenders DHCP set to off since testing it yesterday. In
> the app you cannot set static ip or define DHCP-pool (but it has other
> possibilities that the web interface does not have).
>
>> If you can't stop your extender from creating a new subnet, you'll
>> have to remove it and put it on a shelf somewhere. Two subnets,
>> especially two subnets with conflicting IP addresses, are a recipe
>> for disaster.

> Well, before asking for help here, I was going to send the extender back
> to the shop as faulty :-) Thanks to your kind help, I think it is
> working as it should. Did some testing with it this afternoon, and all
> went smooth.
> And I have learnt some new things :-)

Good :-)

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 2023-11-30 20:39, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2023-11-30 20:23, Jesper Kaas wrote:
>> On 30.11.2023 04:10, Char Jackson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 23:57:33 +0100, Jesper Kaas
>>> <jesperk@neitakk.online.no> wrote:

....

>> I set the gateway address for the main router to 10.0.0.1 this
>> morning, after You and Carlos discovered the possibility of error if
>> the former gateway address, 1.0.0.138, was handed out as an ip-address
>> for a connecting device. Is that what you think was the cause for the
>> trouble?
>
> It is certainly possible. If the GW address is given to some other
> machine by the DHCP server, the entire LAN will crash.
>
> That and the extender dhcp and routing.

Ok, the LAN might still work, machine to machine. But Internet would be
out, and Windows would complain that there was no Internet (which I
think it did).

And if the 138 colliding address happened to be the one of the extender,
then the extender itself would be out of commission.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 13:25:34 -0600, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:

>On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 16:10:51 +0100, Jesper Kaas <kaasjesper0@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On 30.11.2023 15:09, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> PS: Back in the olden days at work I once  a list of ip-adresses to
>>>> set for a new appliance in the lab. On one PC i used something like
>>>> 160.53.47.2. The IT-department complained, saying it was best to not
>>>> use the first 4 adresses in a range. So I changed the 160.53.47.2 to
>>>> 160.53.47.5. I had used 2 as I knew that the first 2 numbers are
>>>> reserved.
>>>> Any comments on this?
>>>
>>> That's just some internal policy.
>>>
>>> The only addresses reserved by protocol are the first and the last (0
>>> and 255, usually). Network and broadcast addresses.
>>>
>>> Some places use the first or the last usable address (1 or 254) for the
>>> router. Then they can reserve some range for fixed machines, like a
>>> printer.
>>>
>>> Most typically, they will use DHCP for everything, and thus organize the
>>> IPs at a central machine with just a text editor.
>>>
>>They use x.x.x.0 or is it x.x.x.1 for gateway.
>
>Within the IPv4 protocol, the lowest possible address (x.x.x.0) refers to the
>subnet itself, while the highest possible address (x.x.x.255) is the broadcast
>address for that subnet. That leaves the usable range of addresses as x.x.x.1
>thru x.x.x.254.

Following up to my own post, some inadvertent editing crept in. The info above
was supposed to be an example relevant to a 255.255.255.0 subnet mask, chosen
because that's a very common mask. Other masks can yield different results.

>There's nothing magical about those addresses, but it's
>conventional to assign the static addresses starting at the lower, or sometimes
>the upper, end of the range, and then carve out a DHCP pool from what's left.
>
>>It is strict static ip on
>>I think everything except PCs/laptops. It's a hospital where security is
>>a vital issue, and a guess from me would be that there are in the order
>>of 5 to 10.000 net-connected devices on 3 locations.
>>For us that have service on the lab instruments and install the smaller
>>ones (hundreds) the fixed IP's is a unique identifier in tables, and can
>>be used for access to the webserver most of these devices have.
>
>Sounds good.