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.
Related
Ok, I have bridged a connection from my laptop (xp pro) to my Xbox 360 with a crossover cable. I have my ppc 6800 mogul tethered to the laptop to provide the internet with ICS. Here is my problem... When I test everything out, I get a NAT setting of "moderate". I need to get the NAT settings "open" in order for it to work correctly. I have played like this for the past couple of days, but I have to have one of my friends invite me anytime that I want to play.
Do you think that it is my phone is the problem, or the laptop? I wish I could just get cable or dsl, but it's not available in my area.
Any help welcome!
Thanks!
Honestly I'm shocked you are trying to do this at all. All the XBOX people I know won't even use a router because of lag.
yeah i don't think using the internet connection from your cell phone could be expected to fully support the bandwidth required to run xbox live...
skanndelus said:
yeah i don't think using the internet connection from your cell phone could be expected to fully support the bandwidth required to run xbox live...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Microsoft requires 256 down and 64 up. I have supplied 1.5 down and 144 up. The only thing that I seem to be having a problem with is a little bit of lag (150 to 250ms). My real issue is the ability to connect to others to join in a session. That is where my NAT settings come into play. If you have a moderate or strict setting, it is almost impossible to join in.
that's pretty near... i would have never thought it could support it... awesome
dont understand what you mean only because i dont have a 360 but i have done this before.
Just replace the ps2 for 360 and the wifi connection for the cell connection. Not saying it will help but maybe something will. it may have things that you didn't do.
http://www.i-hacked.com/content/view/118/62/
This won't work.
ATT and most providers data networks uses NAT.
This means your phone gets an address like 10.0.42.123 in ATT's cellular network -- and has a public IP of e.g. 64.2.3.2.
Obviously this is NAT -- and it of course is not in a DMZ, nor does it have port forwarding for XBOX live to your cell's IP.
From wikipedia:
In computer networking, Network Address Translation (NAT, also known as Network Masquerading, Native Address Translation or IP Masquerading) is a technique of transceiving network traffic through a router that involves re-writing the source and/or destination IP addresses and usually also the TCP/UDP port numbers of IP packets as they pass through.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Drawbacks
Hosts behind NAT-enabled routers do not have true end-to-end connectivity and cannot participate in some Internet protocols. Services that require the initiation of TCP connections from the outside network, or stateless protocols such as those using UDP, can be disrupted. Unless the NAT router makes a specific effort to support such protocols, incoming packets cannot reach their destination. Some protocols can accommodate one instance of NAT between participating hosts ("passive mode" FTP, for example), sometimes with the assistance of an Application Layer Gateway (see below), but fail when both systems are separated from the Internet by NAT.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can call your provider and ask them to open port forwarding, but they won't know what you're talking about -- and since they give DHCP leases the port forward rules would only be temporary anyways. Besides, that would cause serious issues for everyone on their network if they forwarded a port for you. (E.G. Any inbound port request would go to you, disrupting service for other customers.)
I doubt gameplay would be usable over 3G or EVDO anyways.
DUDE! i have been tryin 360+Mogul
i have been tryin and tryin... took my 360 apart tryin some mods. still... ONLY can connect my Xbox 360... to my laptop... which is connected online by my mogul Via WifiRouter-3g to-Usb. WHY cant someone figure out HOW... and Make it available to DIRECTLY CONNECT XBOX 360 ONLINE THROUGH POCKET PC INTERNET SHARING?!?!?! i know i dont have the knowledge... but somone does.... WM5torage... im sure you have heard of it...? it is a strong base.. when i connect my phone to 360 with that app runnin... my 360 thinks about it for min... then decides it wont recognise it...im outta ideas... somone....
IMAGINE THE POSSIBILITIES!!! modify an xbox 360 shell.. and a small laptop screen with xbox harddrive/with a small computer all in one... lay xbox on lap.. flip open the lid.. wireless keyboard and internet.... whoa...
HA my idea has been posted... anyone does it ill sue... jk... kinda.
OH and by the way..
this setup... mogul-wifirouter-3g-usb... usb to pc...pc...eithernet-xbox3sexy... i will dominate all. cod4-BattleField2ModernCombat and bad company lag? whats that
Has anyone had a problem with the Captivate when in both WIFI and 3G coverage the phone will not download or open a webpage? If I shut off one or the other it works but if both are active it hangs up and doesnt download.
Is this by chance on an enterprise wifi access point? Such as one of those expensive cisco APs you find in schools and enterprise class networks? If so, there is currently a driver problem with the captivate connecting to it, but not trasnfering data. Whether the netwrok is encrypted or open doesnt seems to matter. Personally, I find this a bigger problem than the GPS issue. I had to use wifi static to manually set IP, subnet, etc. This is a workaround, not a fix.
jhannaman82 said:
Is this by chance on an enterprise wifi access point? Such as one of those expensive cisco APs you find in schools and enterprise class networks? If so, there is currently a driver problem with the captivate connecting to it, but not trasnfering data. Whether the netwrok is encrypted or open doesnt seems to matter. Personally, I find this a bigger problem than the GPS issue. I had to use wifi static to manually set IP, subnet, etc. This is a workaround, not a fix.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey, I think I'm running into this issue at my workplace (we definitely use those Cisco APs, I see them all around). I'm connected, I have an IP, but I can't browse anywhere.
Here's the weird thing though: I can connect to the company's wifi in any other building (I guess different APs?) than the one I'm in and wifi works fine. It's just the building my cubicle's in that doesn't work and it's infuriating!
well thats dumb.
I had that happen once since I bought the phone on launch. I restarted my phone and it went away.
I've had this problem as well, usually my phone switches to only wifi pretty quickly though, so I don't notice much. The phone acts like it is using the 3G connection because the arrows are both indicating data coming and going, but nothing actually happens unless only one or the other is on.
i need to check this at more places but at home i have a standard dlink dl-624 router with no security over comcast. i think my issue initially was because of the wifi sleep policy (see below) but now i am just getting really really slow speeds. pages seem to load slower than 3G....(i mean really cinemaxHD is showing last of the mohicans in pan and scan)....also the pages time out very very frequently.....
Anyone having problems check out the advanced setting for wifi. The phone has a WIFI sleep policy. my default setting was to disconnect from wifi after the screen locks. my screen locks after 30 seconds. so basically it always looking for my network. you can change it to never.
I want to reiterate our findings again. There are multiple threads on other forums concerning this as well. When it comes to wifi, the captivate has a major problem. DHCP does not work on enterprise networks. Period. It is a driver issue. The network can be open or using any form of encryption, the results are thr same. I had numerous software, hardware and network analyst tackling this issue all week in my department. It is related in part to most enterprise networks not using a default subnet mask of 255.255.255.0. There is a workaround, but it is not a fix. You can either set a static from your static pool of ip's in wifi settings, or, if u connect to multiple networks, use wifi static from the market to remember and apply seperate static configs accross multiple networks which is what were having to do currently. This affects all captivates, one which we consider a major problem with deploying this phone to our other users.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
I had the same problem and this is how a turn around the problem when I'm connected but cannot browse.
-Use Wifi Static
- DNS from google 8.8.8.8,8.8.4.4
- switch to airplane mode
- activate wifi
- test my conection (open the browser and surf)
- switch to phone mode
Hope it help
floppy__ said:
I had the same problem and this is how a turn around the problem when I'm connected but cannot browse.
-Use Wifi Static
- DNS from google 8.8.8.8,8.8.4.4
- switch to airplane mode
- activate wifi
- test my conection (open the browser and surf)
- switch to phone mode
Hope it help
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did this, Wifi Static was being used previously to bypass dhcp, and it correctly assigned the IP settings, used the static I assigned from our static pool of addresses. Still no data transfer over Cisco APs at work.
jhannaman82 said:
Did this, Wifi Static was being used previously to bypass dhcp, and it correctly assigned the IP settings, used the static I assigned from our static pool of addresses. Still no data transfer over Cisco APs at work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
are you able to access a website thru his IP address? in this case it's a DNS problem, try the Google DNS 8.8.8.8 - 8.8.4.4
floppy__ said:
are you able to access a website thru his IP address? in this case it's a DNS problem, try the Google DNS 8.8.8.8 - 8.8.4.4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its hit or miss really, seems the wifi radio stack locks up and stops responding according to our trace logs. yes i have tried both our internal DNS server's as well as googles. Everywhere else works perfectly. But at work with our Cisco open (no security) APs, it doesnt work most of the time. Through whos ip address??? I have a static set from our static pool to make sure dhcp was not the culprit. Its def the device, and not my netwrok. I have over 100 of these APs deployed here.
Wifi works great everywhere else (at home with WPA2, etc). There is def a problem with enterprise cisco APs.
Netmask issue and cisco AP's
Posted this over in development thread.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=7698066&postcount=410
Make sure your netmask is correct.
Thanks jhannaman82
I just wanted to give a big thanks to jhannaman82 for posting his company's findings with these wifi issues. My wifi works 100% at home on my linksys tomato router (of course, with a netmask 255.255.255.0). But on my college campus they use an enterprise router setup with 255.255.0.0 and I have been going NUTS trying to figure out if it is my captivate or the network.
I can sometimes get a few minutes of working connection, but it always seems to crap out within 1 or 2 minutes.
I will attempt to fiddle around with switching the dhcp to static IP, and will post my results. Thanks!
edit: no luck with static IP fiddling so far. from my laptop (connected wirelessly), I gathered that the netmask is actually 255.255.248.0... when I set my captivate's netmask to anything other than 255.255.0.0, it does not connect. It says "connected" when I set the netmask to 255.255.0.0, but as usual no data will transfer (it seems). I'm at a loss. *shrug* Hopefully there's a driver update or something.
Thanks jhannaman82!
I just wrote a script with the GScript app: "ifconfig eth0 netmask 255.255.255.0", and have a shortcut on homescreen. The problem was that the netmask was wrongly set to 255.255.0.0 on my office wifi. Now all I need to do is tap on this shortcut at office, and the connection works!
Has anyone contacted Samsung about this ?
I'm hoping this gets fixed soon... This refuses to stay connected at my school. Huge pain.
I entered in an IP address and 255.255.252.0 for my netmask after seeing what it was on my computer and turn on flight mode and tested the wifi and now it's working. I'm not sure if it's just one of those fluke connections that I get... but we'll see.
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
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.
Short version:
When I turn on my phone's hotspot I want to control the IP addresses it uses. It wants itself to be 192.168.43.135 most of the time, and I need to set it to something else more or less permanently. The address it wants to use is causing conflicts. Can you please help me figure out how to do this?
Long version:
My wife and I use our phones as our home's internet source. Till now, we've just been connecting things directly to our own hotspots individually as needed. However, we now have many more devices wanting a stable connection, so I bought several routers (Asus RT-AX92U). I've set two up as bridges, one connects to my hotspot, and the other to my wife's hotspot. These bridges feed into the third router set up as dual-wan, to either aggregate or fail-over. All this seems to work, EXCEPT, both phone's seem to want to dhcp the IP addresses used over their hotspot connection. I suspect this is causing IP conflicts when both phones are setting their own IP addresss on the same subnet, and their gateway addresses also exactly the same. I've tried setting static IP addresses in the bridges, but then even though their wifi connection remains, the access to the internet drops. I think I need to tell the phone what subnet to use to correct the problem.
Someone please help!
Thanks in advance.
-Jason
PS. both our N20u's are bootloader unlocked. So, you know, I can probably control anything that needs to be, if I only knew what and where.
You'd need to root the phone for that - OneUI does not let you finetune the hotspot functionality unfortunately. In fact, Android itself hardcodes the tethering IP and DHCP range. Once rooted, you can use any of the root tether apps, many of which allow setting your own DHCP ranges and IP addresses.
Another, possibly better solution would be if you took a home broadband data line from your provider/carrier, and used a USB 4G dongle with that.
fonix232 said:
You'd need to root the phone for that - OneUI does not let you finetune the hotspot functionality unfortunately. In fact, Android itself hardcodes the tethering IP and DHCP range. Once rooted, you can use any of the root tether apps, many of which allow setting your own DHCP ranges and IP addresses.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you recommend a tethering app with that ability? I am rooted. The tethering apps I've looked at either won't do that, or get bad reviews for not working well.
0reo said:
Could you recommend a tethering app with that ability? I am rooted. The tethering apps I've looked at either won't do that, or get bad reviews for not working well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't, unfortunately. To be honest, since Android introduced built-in tethering, the market of tether apps have dropped significantly, especially since rooting hasn't been a mainstream thing for the past ~4 years or so.
Why can't you get a real Internet connection? . Main will be the cable/fiber & failover can be your mobile connection.