1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Tivos don't see each other

Discussion in 'TiVo Home Media Features & TiVoToGo' started by Austin Bike, Sep 27, 2012.

  1. Austin Bike

    Austin Bike New Member

    571
    0
    Feb 9, 2003
    So the linkage that works is this:

    http://blogs.amd.com/work/2009/08/20/master-of-my-domain/network_map-6/

    The map is old so there is a few more devices on the network. The Stream is attached to 192.168.1.2 along with the premiere.

    192.168.1.2 has multicast turned off with it off, I can use the stream, but then the premiere cannot see the HD or the server, only the series 2.

    HOWEVER, with multicast turned off on .2 the HD can see everything and I can transfer shows. The next thing to try is to turn on multicast and put the stream somewhere else, but this is incredibly frustrating.

    Why would one company create two products that need to work together where a network router setting needs to be on for one and off for the other?
     
  2. fyodor

    fyodor Member

    523
    0
    Sep 19, 2006
    I understand how you have it set up.

    My point, that I was not really expressing well, is that that certain router products don't really act purely like switches, even when you're not using the uplink capability. Why this should be is unknown to me.

    Thus, I'd try maybe getting some "normal" switches and using them for all intra-lan communications. Then just have a single connection from the highest-tier switch to your router for internet access and DHCP.
     
  3. Soapm

    Soapm Active Member

    1,564
    0
    May 9, 2007
    So close,...
    I'm no expert but you might try changing your IP range. I don't know why but some ranges seem to work happier than others and it's seems random which range works best for you. That's been my experience but again, I'm no expert.
     
  4. Austin Bike

    Austin Bike New Member

    571
    0
    Feb 9, 2003
    They have had problems with static IPs as well as with DHCP starting at .130, .150 and .200, so I do not think it is the IP range.

    I have found that with multicast on, they all work fine, but with multicast on, the tivo stream will not work.

    With multicast off, the MRV is sporadic between the units, each can only see one other. But the tivo stream will work, accessing the premiere.

    What a mess, they have created two features that work differently under different settings. Who was testing this?
     
  5. Austin Bike

    Austin Bike New Member

    571
    0
    Feb 9, 2003
    came home from work, did some recabling and everything is working now. There is a 5 port hub that connects to the main router. on this hub is the stream, the premiere and the other router plugged in as a WAP.

    Clearly there was a problem with router to router so the switch solved that problem, however, now I have even more devices in my complex network.
     
  6. ggieseke

    ggieseke Active Member

    4,018
    11
    May 30, 2008
  7. isglobleweb

    isglobleweb New Member

    1
    0
    Oct 12, 2012
    I had a tivo and like all other people who have one or any other PVR (Personal Video Recorder or Hard-Disk Recorder).
    I love it and i am bothered if I have to watch TV without tivo.
    I've switched to MythTV, which is better and provides automatic commercial elimination to boot.
    TiVo set-top boxes allow you to record television programs on an internal hard drive.
     
  8. lrhorer

    lrhorer New Member

    6,922
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    A hub, or a switch? Ethernet hubs are pretty rare, these days, and very few 100M hubs were ever made. AFAIK, no 1000M hub was ever produced. If it really is a hub, I would definitely get rid of it.

    It's not really that complex. Nonetheless, I do recommend simplifying it by setting up a single, moderately high density, managed Gigabit switch as the central device. Small, unmanaged gigabit switches can be deployed into areas that need more than one device locally, but I would avoid hanging any multi-port devices (that includes WLAN routers) off any of the satellite switches. I also would avoid wireless in general whenever possible.
     
  9. Soapm

    Soapm Active Member

    1,564
    0
    May 9, 2007
    So close,...
    What??? No wireless??? Am I reading that right or did I misunderstand?
     
  10. lrhorer

    lrhorer New Member

    6,922
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    No, you are reading it right. Wireless is a last resort, and in general just plain unreliable. It is only capable of delivering a tiny fraction of the bandwidth of a properly implemented hard-wired solution. In the very best of circumstances, a Wireless-N network might deliver 150 - 180 Mbps of payload across all the hosts combined. Add a repeater and that is cut in half. Add a little noise and interference, and it plummets. It is all but designed to send discovery protocols into a tailspin, and duplicate packets - which aren't supposed to matter other than gobbling up bandwidth but often do - are all but inevitable. Not only that, but every host has to deal with every packet sent on the network, meaning a fair amount of work is done on the hosts simply inspecting and deleting packets.

    Compare that with a 24 port Gig switch with a non-blocking matrix. Hypothetically it can deliver 24,000 Mbps of data and more than 20,000 Mbps of payload with zero duplicate packets, no lost frames, and a bare minimum of traffic appearing at each host that is not destined for that host.

    Now, in reality of course, it would be quite difficult for a home network to sustain anything nearly like 20,000 Mbps of payload - there is just usually not that much data to push around, but my home network, for example regularly experiences reasonably long periods (on the order of hours) pushing up to 3,000 Mbps, and I quite regularly push payloads of up to 950 Mbps between pairs of hosts. Compare that with my sister's wireless network, which is often hard pressed to manage 24 Mbps.
     
  11. Austin Bike

    Austin Bike New Member

    571
    0
    Feb 9, 2003
    Switch. I'm old school enough to remember coax cable network and BALUNs and apparently I use the old words.

    The problem I have is that in the house, there is enough interruption that wifi needs to be in 2 locations for wifi. I have 2 identical routers and I turned one's routing off, use it as a switch and AP.

    Maybe I just need an AP on that 5-port switch and not a router.
     
  12. lrhorer

    lrhorer New Member

    6,922
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    So you are saying you have two WiFi networks connected by a switch (or switches) in the middle, logically speaking? One is a routed network and the other a bridged (AP) network? (This would mean the devices on the routed network are on a different subnet than the one on the switch and the AP.

    This may be a silly question, but you do have the two wireless devices on different wireless channels, correct?
     
  13. Austin Bike

    Austin Bike New Member

    571
    0
    Feb 9, 2003
    yes, both are on different channels, as far away as possible.

    Basically the chain was DIR-655#2 -> 8-port switch -> DIR-655#1 -> Cable modem

    #2 had all DHCP and routing functions turned off. It was an AP and a switch. #1 had all of the routing and functions turned on.

    Basically all of the ports on #2 were full, all of the ports on the 8-port switch were full and #1 had only the link from the 8-port switch and the WAN uplink to the cable modem.

    When I stuck an additional 5-port switch between #2 and the 8-port and moved all of the cables out of #2 into the 5-port, it solved the problem.

    My best guess is that this was a multicast issue.
     
  14. lrhorer

    lrhorer New Member

    6,922
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    OK, just checking.

    That's a puzzler. The routing engine should not even touch the hard-wire ports of the AP, and a switch should properly forward multicast and broadcast MAC and IP addresses.

    There is no question of that. Regardless, however, the topology you have right now is the preferred one, even if you were not having problems with TiVo visibility.
     
  15. Austin Bike

    Austin Bike New Member

    571
    0
    Feb 9, 2003
    Preferred unless you consider the extra device, cables and power required.
     

Share This Page