AP Issue (complicated!! and long)

subway

right, let me start by saying i am tearing my hair out at this one.

i have a USR 8054 router, which i have modded to become a 5450 AP. (easy firmware upgrade)

Background

i have Magnet FTTH, the house is wired with CAT 5 (2 network points per room) and there is a switch in a box in the hall.
if i plug into a network point i get assigned a public IP in the range 87.198.XYZ.ABC

when i plug the 8054 into a netwrok point, it takes an IP in the range 87.198.XYZ.ABC and then assigns private IPs to anything connected via wireless or one of its 4 LAN ports (192.168.123.254)
this has the effect of having a network within a netwrok and half my machines cant see the other half.

to get around this i have installed the modded firmware from DSLreports.com to allow the 8054 to function as a 5450. this allows me to use it in AP mode. what this means is that the 5450 is simply passing through the 87.198.XYZ.ABC network.
i am currently testing this with 2 machines, and XP laptop and a Vista desktop. i will add more machines later, once i have sorted out the teething problems.

Current Situation (what is working)
the 8054 is functioning perfectly as a 5450, i can configure it using the USR utlity and access it via its DHCP assigned IP (87.198.XYZ.ABC)
i can connect to it from the XP laptop using wirelss or wired
i get an IP assigned to the NIC or the wireless NIC that are in the correct range, all DNS servers are correct and the machine thinks its connected directly to the magnet swith.
the vista desktop functions perfectly via wireless, IP correct, internet access etc etc

what is not working
i cannot view any webpages, IP or URL, i cannot ping anything or access any online services when the XP laptop is connected via wireless.
i can browse my local network and i can access the 5450 config page so some part of the connection is working.

if i plug in the ethernet connection all works fine on the laptop

i am using the wireless on the vista desktop so there should not be a problem with the wireless being passed by the 5450

if i switch the firmwre back to 8054 version then there are no issues with woreless from the XP laptop so from what i can tell there is no issue there.

if i run ip config / all with the XP laptop connecet by wirelsss and by lan cable i get identical info for both connection, except of course they both have differnt IPs in the 87.198.XYZ.ABC range.

help
can anyone think of anything i should try or shoud be checking?
i have uninstalled my firewall software,tried enabling and disbaling the windows firewall, all to no affect.
the only thing i cna think, is that for some reason, my wireless card doenst like being in the range 87.198.XYZ.ABC.
i am off to reinstall my dirves, if you have anything you think i should try, please suggest it. i will reinstall my OS if i have to!!

subway

it gets weirder.
the system wont pull an ip on the wireless if the ethernet nic is disabled.
however if i obntain a wireless ip and then disbale the ethernet nic i can continue to browse the internet as long as there is an ethernet cable plugged in.

i have confirmed via ipconfig that there is no IP on the ethernet cable.
this one had me utterly stumped so i think its time for a reinstall

DaSilva

Is the XP laptop by any chance running SP1 or lower? I know Wireless was pretty dodgy pre SP2. Also is there a chance you have the two interfaces bridged? Check under Network connections, should only be two NIC's if there is also an icon below saying something about bridged that my be the cause.

A way to help diagnose whats going on might be to run wireshark on the laptop, disable the ethernet nic, and connect via wireless, ping some of the other machines in your home and then try ping www.google.ie and see whats going on.

How many public IP's do Magnet give you by the way?

subway

thanks for your reply -

XP laptop is running SP3 and is fully up to date.
interfaces are not bridged.

i wil try that utility later on and post the results.

unlimited (afaik) public IPs from Magnet, as long as you connect to the switch (12 port switch in hallway), or daisy chain a switch or AP on to it.

im going to have to post a few questions about their security policy as when i ran some ping tests to find my AP, the test found around 30 other computers in my IP range.
i think this might cause issues if i am using this range as my own personal LAN

rmacm

subway wrote: »

unlimited (afaik) public IPs from Magnet, as long as you connect to the switch (12 port switch in hallway), or daisy chain a switch or AP on to it.

You don't get unlimited public IP addresses from Magnet, the business package only provides one static IP address. If you're on the home package you most likely get a public IP address(es) via DHCP but there certainly isn't an unlimited number of them.

subway

i didnt make any reference to static IP addresses.
you are correct that i get public IP addresses which are assigned by DHCP.
obviously there is a limit to the amount if IPs that the DHCP server can assign to me and the other people on my range.

my point is simply that i can attach a large number of devices, 12 directly to the switch, or more if i daisy chain, and that magnet has not imposed a limit on that number.

rmacm

subway wrote: »

i didnt make any reference to static IP addresses.

Yep I know.

subway wrote: »

my point is simply that i can attach a large number of devices, 12 directly to the switch, or more if i daisy chain, and that magnet has not imposed a limit on that number.

Yep I got your point I was trying to point out that there probably is a limit you just haven't come up against it yet.

subway

glad were all on the same page then

subway

result!
removing xp sp3 beta has resolved the issue.

*edit// addded the word beta

MunsterCycling

Weird... Any notion as to why that worked?


MC

subway

i was trying to remote desktop onto another machine from the problem laptop and i got that "The pre-release version of remote desktop connection has expired" error.

this reminded me that i had instaled SP3 while it was still a beta. i uninstalled the beta, reinstalled the proper version and everything is fine.

i presume it was something dodgy related to the beta, i should have made it clearer in my post above.