Database Info

Is it possible to mns to wireless router via xp computer

been messing with it all day, i'm sure i am doing something wrong googled the hell out of it though.
ok here is what i am trying to do, I just bought a Acer Nettop running XP i installed the HTC drivers on it MNS is working great. i would like to hook up my wireless router to the Ethernet port to share the internet connection with the rest of my gadgets.
any help would be appreciated.

smittycg said:
been messing with it all day, i'm sure i am doing something wrong googled the hell out of it though.
ok here is what i am trying to do, I just bought a Acer Nettop running XP i installed the HTC drivers on it MNS is working great. i would like to hook up my wireless router to the Ethernet port to share the internet connection with the rest of my gadgets.
any help would be appreciated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why don't use Wireless Tether and everything can pull internet from the phone without the need of a router?

Bridge the connections in network connections or use ICS

morbidpete said:
Bridge the connections in network connections or use ICS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
tried both of those, the bridge would connect, but no internet, ics didn't work either, i am pretty tired though probably missing something simple.
WIFI tether is cool and all but i want to use it full time with a dedicated phone and be able to use my wireless printer

I've never been able to get to work if you do post Back with what you did. I think the issue is up addresses, you may have to setup the router gateway address as the pcs ip or even the phones ip... Im not a networking guru though

Kcarpenter said:
I've never been able to get to work if you do post Back with what you did. I think the issue is up addresses, you may have to setup the router gateway address as the pcs ip or even the phones ip... Im not a networking guru though
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to be honest i was hoping someone had done it and could tell me how easy it was. while trying to get it to work today i was just clicking around, tomorrow i'll go about if more scientifically and post all the stuff i'm doing wrong.

I can't see any reason off the top of my head why ICS wouldn't work.
So, let me see if I have this straight. Your phone is connected to your PC via USB. Your access point is connected to the PC via ethernet. And you want other devices to connect over wifi and have Internet access. That about right?
Try this... Assign the ethernet port on your PC a static IP address of 192.168.1.1. Connect that to the "Internet" port on your access point, and assign that port an IP address of 192.168.1.2. In the wireless setup on your access point, assign the wireless side the static ip address 192.168.2.1 and tell it to act as a dhcp server, and hand out addresses from 192.168.2.100 to 192.168.2.200. Netmask in all cases will be 255.255.255.0. For dns go ahead and use 208.67.222.222 unless you have another dns service that you prefer.
The router should be configured to use 192.168.1.1 as its default gateway. The wireless devices should be set to use 192.168.2.1 as their default gateway.
This *should* work. Different accesss points can be finicky in various ways, but I really don't see why the setup I've outlined wouldn't work....

[Q] OT: Static IP or DHCP

I've always used static IP addresses in my home network - primarily because I thought it was the only way to be able to use port forwarding as needed for different devices: xbox live, psn, bit torrent, etc. Plus I thought it just gave an extra - albeit small - layer of protection to the network.
However, last night we picked up a Nook Color for my wife and this thing has NO ability to assign static IP addresses!
Needless to say, she was a bit irate as I was enjoying the latest TNT Lite update on my gTab (thanks roebeet!) and she couldn't do anything with her shiny new Nook.
So the question is - do static IP addresses really buy me anything anymore? Or have routers evolved enough with UPnP to handle port forwarding properly?
Is it possible to have DHCP enabled on my router, but still assign static IP addresses to devices like an XBox?
I'm currently using a D-Link DIR-655N router.
Thanks!
P.S. Roebeet - my wife wants to know if you'll be picking up and tweaking a Nook Color any time soon.

Yes, you can do that. Most routers will allow you to use a specific range of IPs for DHCP so you can allocate a chunk for automatic assignment and use the rest for static.
For example, on my router, I set DHCP to use the 200-250 range in the last octet, and staticly assign desktops and other stationary devices with 0-199. So, my desktop is statically set to 10.11.3.100 so I can VNC from work, but my g-Tablet will get an IP between 10.11.3.200 - 10.11.3.250 when it connects to my home network, depending on what other addresses are already used.
I only use DHCP on mobile devices because it makes hopping between access points easier, so I don't need that many addresses reserved for it.
Hope this helps.

KnightCrusader said:
I only use DHCP on mobile devices because it makes hopping between access points easier, so I don't need that many addresses reserved for it.
Hope this helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
EXACTLY!! We're getting so many IP devices over here that I'm getting tired of always trying to keep track of static IPs (and assign them).
I went ahead and RTFM and turns out it was very simple with this router - just like you said. Thanks!
Do you use any extra protection in addition to WPA - like MAC filtering etc - to keep the neighbors off your network? That was the only other thing I didn't like about DHCP - it just makes it that much easier for someone else to jump on.
Then again, I guess if they go through the trouble of hacking my WPA pw, there's not much else that's going to keep them out, right?

pogul said:
I've always used static IP addresses in my home network - primarily because I thought it was the only way to be able to use port forwarding as needed for different devices: xbox live, psn, bit torrent, etc. Plus I thought it just gave an extra - albeit small - layer of protection to the network.
However, last night we picked up a Nook Color for my wife and this thing has NO ability to assign static IP addresses!
Needless to say, she was a bit irate as I was enjoying the latest TNT Lite update on my gTab (thanks roebeet!) and she couldn't do anything with her shiny new Nook.
So the question is - do static IP addresses really buy me anything anymore? Or have routers evolved enough with UPnP to handle port forwarding properly?
Is it possible to have DHCP enabled on my router, but still assign static IP addresses to devices like an XBox?
I'm currently using a D-Link DIR-655N router.
Thanks!
P.S. Roebeet - my wife wants to know if you'll be picking up and tweaking a Nook Color any time soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
pogul , I have a DIR655. I set all my stuff except laptops up static. You can login to the admin of the router and reserve IP's for certain equip. I do this for all my wired and wireless.
I mainly like to know what is a certain IP so I can easily RDP into said machines.

pogul said:
Do you use any extra protection in addition to WPA - like MAC filtering etc - to keep the neighbors off your network? That was the only other thing I didn't like about DHCP - it just makes it that much easier for someone else to jump on.
Then again, I guess if they go through the trouble of hacking my WPA pw, there's not much else that's going to keep them out, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When I lived in my last apartment, I used to set up my access point to have WPA. I know WEP can be broken in seconds and MAC addresses are easy to spoof, so I don't bother with them. They do a good job of keeping casual people from getting on your network, but if they are determined, they'll get on somehow.
Now I moved back with my parents in BFE, the nearest neighbor is a mile away, so I leave my access points wide open so my new devices and old devices alike can use them.

KnightCrusader said:
When I lived in my last apartment, I used to set up my access point to have WPA. I know WEP can be broken in seconds and MAC addresses are easy to spoof, so I don't bother with them. They do a good job of keeping casual people from getting on your network, but if they are determined, they'll get on somehow.
Now I moved back with my parents in BFE, the nearest neighbor is a mile away, so I leave my access points wide open so my new devices and old devices alike can use them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I use both WPA and mac filtering. I can see about 20 wireless routers from where I live, so you never know.
Remember google got in trouble for driving through neighborhoods and getting data from open networks a while back.

[Q] SSH Tunnel Question

I have a question regarding the feasibility of using an SSH Tunnel to achieve a specific goal.
I recently added my wife to my T-Mobile plan. We have excellent reception and coverage practically everywhere - except in her office. I think it has something to do with the thick metal roof on her building.
Anyway, connecting to her office Wifi, and enabling Wifi-calling allows all SMS/Call traffic through. The problem is that when making/receiving calls on Wifi, there is no audio transmitted through on either end. Wifi-calling works just fine from home, which leads me to believe that her enterprise IT department has blocked certain ports on the firewall that the T-Mobile Wifi-calling needs to operate correctly.
My questions is: If I create an SSH server on my WHS here at home (we have FIOS 30/15, with a low 2 digit ping, so bandwidth/latency shouldn't be an issue), can I then tunnel all of her android office-wifi-traffic through that SSH Server - and would that theoretically allow all ports to be open/available?
Before I take the time to set it all up, I just want a second opinion that it should work.
Thanks.

gat0rjay said:
I have a question regarding the feasibility of using an SSH Tunnel to achieve a specific goal.
I recently added my wife to my T-Mobile plan. We have excellent reception and coverage practically everywhere - except in her office. I think it has something to do with the thick metal roof on her building.
Anyway, connecting to her office Wifi, and enabling Wifi-calling allows all SMS/Call traffic through. The problem is that when making/receiving calls on Wifi, there is no audio transmitted through on either end. Wifi-calling works just fine from home, which leads me to believe that her enterprise IT department has blocked certain ports on the firewall that the T-Mobile Wifi-calling needs to operate correctly.
My questions is: If I create an SSH server on my WHS here at home (we have FIOS 30/15, with a low 2 digit ping, so bandwidth/latency shouldn't be an issue), can I then tunnel all of her android office-wifi-traffic through that SSH Server - and would that theoretically allow all ports to be open/available?
Before I take the time to set it all up, I just want a second opinion that it should work.
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wouldn't having it travel through the internet make it potentially public data being transferred? I know the office building I work in also has crummy connection and they are on high alert with potential "hackers", and when the IT people see that there is a direct connect from their servers to your house, they'll block it and you might get into trouble.
Sent from my SGH-T999
If I helped please press the thanks button

neim81094 said:
Ok so correct me if I'm wrong but you want her office to connect to your Wi-Fi through a ssh tunnel? I don't even think that's possible . That would be like office>server>internet>bouncing around>your router>WiFi and back? I though ssh tunnels were only for lan connections
Sent from my SGH-T999
If I helped please press the thanks button
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The way it would work (in my head) is that my WHS would act as an SSH proxy server. She would connect to her office wifi, then on her phone, she would use the SSH Tunnel app to define the location of my WHS as her SSH proxy server. All of her internet traffic would be sent (using her office wifi) directly to the WHS at home, the WHS, would then translate all of the traffic out to the internet, and return the results back through the SSH tunnel.
It should work, I'm just not sure if anyone with a more real-world working knowledge of this stuff has any input for me?

Why don't you try it with another WiFi? Like Starbucks or something test to see if that method will work that is definitely an interesting idea.
Sent from my SGH-T999
If I helped please press the thanks button

encryption is not compatible RANT

I have all kinds of computers tablets and gadgets. I have had no problems connecting to my wireless network until the Microsoft Surface came along. My router is the Motorola NVG 510. It doesn't have many settings that can be changed. I am using WPA2 Personal AES and a password. The only way I can Connect My Surface to this network is to turn off encryption. l had the same problem with the Surface RT. .
Tried for 24 hours now to connect... AT & T Says the problem is Microsoft related and Microsoft blames AT & T . l GIVE UP!!. Returning the Surface and going to keep my Samsung Slate 7 . . . has Windows8- WiFi and 3G. . .

how the hell do AT&T come into your wireless settings?

SixSixSevenSeven said:
how the hell do AT&T come into your wireless settings?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is AT&T's router. I have Uverse and this is the one they gave us.Motorola should be who i call if anyone but the problem is Microsoft's ..All others have no problem connecting

shEEEsh said:
I have all kinds of computers tablets and gadgets. I have had no problems connecting to my wireless network until the Microsoft Surface came along. My router is the Motorola NVG 510. It doesn't have many settings that can be changed. I am using WPA2 Personal AES and a password. The only way I can Connect My Surface to this network is to turn off encryption. l had the same problem with the Surface RT. .
Tried for 24 hours now to connect... AT & T Says the problem is Microsoft related and Microsoft blames AT & T . l GIVE UP!!. Returning the Surface and going to keep my Samsung Slate 7 . . . has Windows8- WiFi and 3G. . .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Never had an issue with any form of encryption with the Surface RT - it's got the standard windows 8 wifi stack and connects to anything I throw at it, including WPA2/AES.
Not sure why you're having an issue, but you haven't given us much to go on for troubleshooting.

And getting a real router isn't possible?

Talon Pro said:
And getting a real router isn't possible?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apparently this (MOTOROLA NVG510) router is the only one I can use in my area with U-Verse.

Thats bull. Is it a combo router/modem? If so you should still be able to hook up a wireless router off of that if it has at least one ethernet port.

see thats what BT claimed when they installed BT infinity at my grandparents but we dont have the stock router running off of it

Thanks for the suggestions. I returned the Surface. I don't know enough about routers and modems to install anything else or even how to buy something else. On the other hand. Annoys me that every gadget I own (and there are many) connects with no problem EXCEPT the surface.
diane

Your router is old. Something is probably interfering with the Surface Pro's connectivity. Your SP's wifi card isn't busted if it can connect without encryption. It shouldn't have a problem. I'd suggest ditching the modem's wifi and buying a router and using that instead for wifi and leave the modem alone.
99% sure it's a setting in your router that's causing you to not be able to connect a new device through wifi.

First port of call when having wifi issues is to remove all encryption/security settings and have it as a fully open network, if that works then slowly add security/encryption until you find out where it falls over, worse case scenario is a network that appears to be open but uses MAC address filtering to keep people out.

Trig0r said:
First port of call when having wifi issues is to remove all encryption/security settings and have it as a fully open network, if that works then slowly add security/encryption until you find out where it falls over, worse case scenario is a network that appears to be open but uses MAC address filtering to keep people out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the problem was for sure the modem. There are no settings to tweak... It's gotta be the worst modem on the planet-but then U.verse doesn't feel any faster than my old ATT DSL connection. I asked to have my DSL back and ATT said that was not an option. ATT told me this modern is the only one for my area. Maybe it is time I looked into Brighthouse. I am sure there is a way around that modem but in my frustration I returned the Surface. Very sure I will buy another Surface . . I still have my Samsung Slate 7 with Windows 8... Another plus is it has a 3G connection. the more I use Windows 8 the more I like it, wish the Slate was a bit smaller.

Wireless encryption is done router side rather than modem side. You can use the ISP's modem and the connect it to an aftermarket router without issue. Its impossible for the ISP to prevent that. If its a combo modem and router then it is still possible to do.
All routers must have settings, unless you mean it has limited settings.
I've lucked out personally. My ISP's free router isn't the best on the planet but as a freeby is great. Full range of settings. Its a combo modem/router in one but I haven't had issues with that and it is perfectly happy for me to plug other routers into it (which I did once as an ethernet extension cable of sorts, otherwise my other routers are inferior) or according to a friend who used to be on the same ISP it quite happily connects to other modens and acts as a router perfectly fine still.

SixSixSevenSeven said:
Wireless encryption is done router side rather than modem side. You can use the ISP's modem and the connect it to an aftermarket router without issue. Its impossible for the ISP to prevent that. If its a combo modem and router then it is still possible to do.
All routers must have settings, unless you mean it has limited settings.
I've lucked out personally. My ISP's free router isn't the best on the planet but as a freeby is great. Full range of settings. Its a combo modem/router in one but I haven't had issues with that and it is perfectly happy for me to plug other routers into it (which I did once as an ethernet extension cable of sorts, otherwise my other routers are inferior) or according to a friend who used to be on the same ISP it quite happily connects to other modens and acts as a router perfectly fine still.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We already tried to tell him that and he wouldnt listen.

>We already tried to tell him that and he wouldnt listen.
OP's name is Diane.
Secondly, as posted in the OP, the device is a Motorola NVG 510. A 10-second lookup would show that it's a combined ADSL2+router, and it's not a simple matter of swapping out a router. Combined-function devices are SOP for leased models, since it saves the company money over having two boxes.
http://google.com/search?q=Motorola+NVG+510
It's a Surface problem. The user shouldn't be expected to mess with things like router settings and learn to be a geek. The device in question is obviously in popular use, and it's up to MS to get it right. The OP did the correct thing in returning the Surface.
However, for those with more tech savvy, the above search produces this help page for the modem+router,
http://www.ron-berman.com/2011/11/24/motorola-nvg510-help-page-for-att-u-verse-users/
which has both the manual and more importantly, a FAQ to troubleshoot connection issues, and links to more appropriate forums to ask further questions on this particular topic.

As I said, even on a combo unit you can use a different router. As long as the new router can recieve internet from any other device via ethernet all you do is connect it to the ISPs router. It will then share that connection. Yes your ISP's router will still be broadcasting but so will the new 3rd party one, you just connect to that. This is a configuration I have tested with a BT homehub and some ****ty Netgear.
To access the new routers settings, unplug it from the ISPs router first and then access the settings in the normal way. or if you can find the new local IP for the additional router you can use that.

>As I said, even on a combo unit you can use a different router. As long as the new router can recieve internet from any other device via ethernet all you do is connect it to the ISPs router. It will then share that connection.
Either the new router has to be reconfig'ed into an AP, or the old router needs to be disabled. Can't have both routers active. Likewise, the old wifi needs to be disabled, or the new one reconfigured that they don't conflict. Regardless, it's not plug and play. Either or both units would need configuration.
The household Internet router is the single most critical piece of equipment there is, because if the user messes up, s/he loses Internet access ENTIRELY and access to any further help. Without local help, that may mean several days' downtime and an expensive bill for onsite repair. I would NEVER, EVER tell a non-tech user to reconfigure his/her router, especially when the person said "I don't know enough about routers and modems to install anything else or even how to buy something else."
Everyone here has good intentions and want to help. Then, the first thing to helping is to listen to what is said, and gauge the person's comfort level with tech. No one even bothered to check up on the OP's router model.
The OP has a stable, working setup. Anything that jeopardizes that setup is bad advice, not unless you are willing to foot the onsite service cost for the person. The preferred solution is to remove the known-problem component, which in this case is the Surface.
PS: A long shot is to go into the Surface's Device Manager, select the Properties tab of the wifi card, and muck around with the advanced settings (if there are any).

You can totally daisy-chain routers using their default settings. Not sure why you would think otherwise...
That said, if you wanted port forwarding and such to work smoothly, it *would* be best to turn off DHCP and NAT on the inner router. However, that's not necessary to simply get Internet access via the router.

GoodDayToDie said:
You can totally daisy-chain routers using their default settings. Not sure why you would think otherwise...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which is precisely what I originally said.
I have daisy chained a cheap as **** netgear router to my BT homehub without any setting changes at all. I was actually using it as an ethernet extension cable pretty much, I didnt have a single cable long enough so I plugged one between the homehub/main router and the netgear and one between the netgear and a raspberry pi. Would you look at that, my laptop can connect to the netgear and get internet access from it, the pi also connects via its ethernet port perfectly.
My grandparents use a set of homeplugs, how do they connect? daisy chaining.
One of my mates has 3 ethernet devices in one room but only one LAN port drilled into the wall (he had an electrician out once to actually have LAN sockets fitted in a few rooms). Solution: cheap wireless router connected to the LAN port in the wall. Other devices connected to the router. Router had 6 ports so he still has 2 left over. Devices connect to it fine. Originally it was default settings but he has since gone and disabled the routers wifi as he doesnt use it.
That said. I came across a linksys unit once which refused to be used as an access point of any kind. But that was only once.

>You can totally daisy-chain routers using their default settings. Not sure why you would think otherwise...
Having nested routers (ie segmenting the network) is a prescription for myriad network problems in the hands of a non-tech user. Again, listen to what the OP said, rather than assume everyone is a geek who knows what DHCP and NAT means, let alone how to change them.
Even if the OP can get the new router configured and running properly, the potential for problem remains. When ISP service goes down, the ISP tech will remote troubleshoot the leased equipment (the old router), since that's the ISP's responsibility. With user equipment attached, troubleshooting responsibility passes on to the user, which the OP has stated in no uncertain terms that she's not capable of.
The point isn't to get Internet access. The OP already has Internet access. The point is to get the Surface to connect to the network, but NOT AT THE EXPENSE of adding networking complications that the OP can't handle.
>I have daisy chained...
This suffices for simple Internet access, until you run into programs or devices that break because of the multiple redirections. I doubt UPNP/DLNA works on nested NATs. Ditto discovery. Devices/periphs on one network segment won't be able to connect to those on another segment.
The wifi will work, but given that most 2.4GHz wifi default to channel 1 or 6, it will likely conflict with the old wifi and work POORLY when both are active.

PS4 Remote Play Solutions?

I am trying to get the PS4 Remote Play ap / feature to work better. I have changed my PS4 to DMZplus mode so that it shows nat type 1 / open. I changed the wireless channel from 2 to 9 to clear up any possible congestion there. One interesting thing I noticed on the settings menu of the ap, is you can check the nat type presumably of the phone, because my phone shows nat type 3 in that settings menu, but I show nat type 1 on the actual ps4 network settings and connection test.
Anyway this is super frustrating and completely disapointing. I feel so dumb. I changed wireless providers from AT&T to T-Mobile basically for this phone and the PS4 remote play integration, and myself and many others cant get it to work reliably like it does on PS Vita.
I am using AT&T Uverse for my home network, with a Pace 5031NV gateway from AT&T.
Anyone have any magic tricks to get PS4 Remote Play to work stable as advertized?

HappyGreg said:
I am trying to get the PS4 Remote Play ap / feature to work better. I have changed my PS4 to DMZplus mode so that it shows nat type 1 / open. I changed the wireless channel from 2 to 9 to clear up any possible congestion there. One interesting thing I noticed on the settings menu of the ap, is you can check the nat type presumably of the phone, because my phone shows nat type 3 in that settings menu, but I show nat type 1 on the actual ps4 network settings and connection test.
Anyway this is super frustrating and completely disapointing. I feel so dumb. I changed wireless providers from AT&T to T-Mobile basically for this phone and the PS4 remote play integration, and myself and many others cant get it to work reliably like it does on PS Vita.
I am using AT&T Uverse for my home network, with a Pace 5031NV gateway from AT&T.
Anyone have any magic tricks to get PS4 Remote Play to work stable as advertized?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try channel 6 for wireless. It's better. Not sure about the rest though as I haven't tried remote play yet :good:

Cool, I will try that. What is different about wireless channel 6 though ?

I get pretty damn good remote play on my device/network here are my tips. (some people may argue that some of these are "irrelevant" but if your getting bad experiences, they are worth a shot?)
1. Plug your PS4 in to the router via Ethernet this improved my remote play buy a TON it went from barely playable to working perfectly. In all honesty the PS4 was shipped with such a crappy WiFi card , google "PS4 Wifi card" and the top results are all post about how they suck.
2. This one im not 100% sure about, however i know that my Download speeds on the connection test improve ALOT when I do this.
Dont connect using "easy connect" and for your DNS use a google dns like 8.8.8.8 or 8.8.4.4. I went from download speeds of 5gigs down to 30+
However, Im pretty sure if your on the same network, the speed of your internet doesn't matter so if you have a good router you should be set to go. If you only have been trying it with your PS4 on wifi. Plug it in, I promise you will notice!
If your playing from outside the network, well you need a pretty decent upload speed on what your ps4 is hooked up to. You most likely will not have a good experience from a mobile network. I have FIOS at home and I play from my office which has a Wireless AC connection and FIOS and I can remote play like a dream but when I go to my friends house who has XFINITY and some ISP provided netgear router, the experience is less optimal, still playable to an extent but not nearly as smooth.
sorry for the wall of text! Hope this helps.