Wireless connection problems

[danguyf]

I'm trying to connect a second MVP via a D-Link 2100 access point in client mode. Details are here and here.

To recap:

• MVP #1, connected via ethernet to a Dell TrueMobile 2300 router providing DHCP connected to the HTPC, works.
  
• MVP #2, connected to a D-Link 2100AP with a second D-Link 2100AP connected to a second NIC in the HTPC, does not work.
  
• HTPC can see both 2100APs.
  
• D-Link 634 router successfully assigns an IP to MVP #2.
  
• MVP #2 goes back and forth between "Connecting to DHCP Server..." and "Connecting to MediaMVP Boot Server..." endlessly.

At the moment the break-down is as follows:[indent]
MVP #1: 192.168.2.90
NIC #1: 192.168.2.5
Dell router: 192.168.2.1
D-Link router: 192.168.0.1
NIC #2: 192.168.0.105
AP #1: 192.168.0.50
AP #2: 192.168.0.55
MVP #2: 192.168.0.190
[/indent]

I have also tried:

• changing the IPs so all are 192.168.0.x:
  [indent][indent]
  MVP #1: 192.168.0.9
  NIC #1: 192.168.0.5
  Dell router: 192.168.0.1
  D-Link router: 192.168.0.2
  NIC #2: 192.168.0.105
  AP #1: 192.168.0.50
  AP #2: 192.168.0.55
  MVP #2: 192.168.0.190
  [/indent]
  This resulted in IP conflicts (even though I told the Dell router to assign 192.168.0.3-49 and the D-Link to assign 192.168.0.50-254), inability to reach the Dell router, and MVP #1 no long working.
  [/INDENT]
  
• "Bridge Connections" on the two NICs with the above two sets of IPs, neither of which worked.
  
• Connecting a second Dell router between AP #2 and MVP #2, with and without DHCP enabled. This made no apparent difference.
  
• Bridging the connection between the two APs.
  
• Disabling NIC #1 and restarting GBPVR to see if it was just able to respond to one network at a time -- no dice.

I need help like woah.

[wtg]

It's hard to understand your arrangement without looking at the other posts, but having done so, I think I understand.

Having two nics in your HTPC requires that both have different subnets, so you have to go with your first arrangement. The gbpvr server is going to have to work on both subnets at once though, and that might be a bit more than it was designed for. You should be able to find out.

Disable nic#1 that has the working MVP and restart gbpvr. At this point you've got one network and you should be able to get MVP #2 to function. If not, my guess is it's something to do with your WAP configuration. If and when you get that ironed out you can enable nic#1 and see if MVP #1 can connect. If not, at least at that point you'll know that it's gbpvr and not the network.

Good luck!

[SFX Group]

Having two nics in your HTPC requires that both have different subnets

Not true...............

I am a Network Infrastructure engineer and 2 NICs in one PC isnt the easiest way to do things, the only reason for this would be to span 2 segmants which you shouldnt have in a house.

This will be to do with the routing table, 1 NIC is all you need the buy hardware to connect loads of stuff to it (HUB or SWITCH) if you really need to 2 NIC (and i cant see why, its not the way to go, creating a heahache for you) then your need to set up the priority in the routing table correctly and gateways. SOftware always tends to have a problem with this unless it can bind to both addresses (which GBPVR has no way of doing so your relying on Windows to do it, it want window that well so routing is a nightmare).

As for your problem i am unsure withouth seing your topology but sounds like a Wireless issue somewhere, there always a nightmare, i dont go near them unless i really have to , i really woudl prefer to dig a huge hole and put come conduit and CAT5e down it, will save years of problems after.

Many Thanks
Ashley

[djtaylor]

Wireless bridging is layer 2 bridging, IP addresses are irrelevant so what I would suggest to do is configure the Access Point onto a switch so that you are just using one network card, no reason why you shouldn't use a second one but no need either.

Next configure the other AP in client mode and check that you can connect a PC using it's ethernet port to the client mode AP ethernet port. At this point, you should have full connectivity through to the HTPC or anywhere else that you should be able to go.

If this works, then replace PC with MVP!

Are you also accepting other wireless clients such as laptops to the first AP? if not then the other thing you could try although it's principally the same thing, is to set up the AP's in bridge mode instead of AP and client. It's still layer 2 bridging however which is why it shouldn't really matter.

David.

[wtg]

Quote:
Originally Posted by wtg
Having two nics in your HTPC requires that both have different subnets

Not true...............

It's an aside issue and I don't want to hijack the thread, but you're saying you can have two nics in one PC residing on 192.168.0.X and a 255.255.255.0 netmask, and then use a routing table to direct traffic to each nic individually? And Windows can deal with the outbound traffic correctly?

Hmm, learn something new every day...

[danguyf]

Thank you all for your advice. So the consensus seems to be that I should try the following?:

Code:

[HTPC]---NIC---[switch]-----[MVP #1]
                  |
                   `-----[AP #1]

[AP #2]---[MVP #2]

Could I use one of my routers in place of the switch?


I may just bite the bullet and run more coax to the basement so I can put the cable modem and router down there to create the following:

Code:

[cable modem]----[WiFi router]---NIC---[HTPC]
                       |
                       +----------[NAS]
                       |
                       +----------[MVP #1]

[AP #2]---[MVP #2]

[djtaylor]

It's an aside issue and I don't want to hijack the thread, but you're saying you can have two nics in one PC residing on 192.168.0.X and a 255.255.255.0 netmask, and then use a routing table to direct traffic to each nic individually? And Windows can deal with the outbound traffic correctly?

Hmm, learn something new every day...

Sure you can have two NIC's in the same machine on the same subnet. I do it all the time, wired and wireless NIC's connected at the same time. Windows automatically adjusts the routing metric to set the wireless metric higher such that if the LAN connection is there, it has a lower metric and thus routes that way first.

David.

[djtaylor]

Could I use one of my routers in place of the switch?
[/code]

Yep but the simplest way to do that then is to not use the WAN port on that router but rather just connect the cable modem to a LAN port. You'll probably also need to disable dhcp on that too.

This way, it'll just be operating as an access point with a switch.

Not much point making it route if you don't need to route.

David.

[KS4UA]

Reading all of this makes me think about what I had to do in order to hook up my new MVP.

Yes, it was a pain to run a Cat5e cable from my Netgear router/switch (connected to the server PC in the office) to near the TV in the living room. I had to drill some small holes near the baseboards in each room, feed the cable down the hole, get into the crawlspace, run the cable to the other hole, and then pull the cable up through it. But the hardest part was getting a good RJ45 connector crimped on both ends of the cable. That's because I was a newbie with Cat5e cable construction.

Still, it sounds like my install was probably easier than trying to do it wireless.

[danguyf]

If I knew how to punch a hole through the bedroom floor into the garage, then drill diagonally through the cement floor and the basement wall into it, I would try that.

My setup now looks like the first diagram in my last post, with the AP, HTPC, and MVP all going into the LAN ports of a wired router. Too my surprise the HTPC gets its IP from the WiFi router and everything seems to be able to see everything else on the network at large. Rock on, djtaylor!!

No change in MVP #2's behavoir, but I haven't had time to check the logs to try to see what's going on.

If I were to set the two APs up as a bridge at this point would I need to do anything special? I can put them in bridge mode and feed them each other's MACs -- at that point will they effectively mimic a piece of ethernet cable?