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

Ultimate Wireless Network

Discussion in 'TiVo Home Media Features & TiVoToGo' started by vlxjim, Dec 19, 2003.

  1. Apr 7, 2005 #281 of 606
    ashu

    ashu User title defunct

    9,158
    0
    Nov 8, 2002
    MD
    Oh - I got my 8-port GigaFast Ethernet (10/100) Switch, for FREE after rebates. You can frequently find sub-10 deals on 4-port switches at CompUSSR, Worst Buy and Crappy City.
     
  2. Apr 8, 2005 #282 of 606
    wombat2010

    wombat2010 New Member

    22
    0
    Apr 2, 2005
    I've done some testing and it seems you are right. Whichever device (TiVo or XBox) I tell to connect to the network first (following a power cycling of the G820) gets an IP address and connection no problem. Whichever I tell to connect second gets an error (no gateway found, etc.). It does not matter whether the bridge (G820) is plugged into one of the four numbered switch ports or the uplink port, nor does it matter whether either device is connected in a lower or higher numbered switch port (seemed dumb that it would, but I've seen dumber things work). I also played with which numbered switch port the G820 was plugged into.

    So from your quote above, it sounds like you think it is a limitation of the G820, not the router/switch? :( That is dismaying, because as you pointed out, I can get a switch for next to nothing, but I paid $75 for that wireless bridge, and I don't even know that a different bridge would work any better. Any chance it's the switch? I guess it won't cost me much to try it and find out (well, except for the cost of time, but sheesh, I've gone well past the point of no return now, anyway--this is becoming more about the journey than the destination).

    Thanks again.
     
  3. Apr 8, 2005 #283 of 606
    Stormspace

    Stormspace Electrocuted by TiVo

    5,171
    0
    Apr 13, 2004
    Hartsville, SC
    I'm not 100% sure about your situation, but bridges in some configurations require a bridge at both ends.
     
  4. Apr 8, 2005 #284 of 606
    ashu

    ashu User title defunct

    9,158
    0
    Nov 8, 2002
    MD
    Wombat - glancing at the G820 manual ...
    1. try turning off Super G mode in all forms (Advanced Tab, Performance menu) - my Belkins work better when all fancy-schamncy hi-speed and turbo modes are OFF.
    2. This device needs the Gateway and DNS to be your router's IP (set these on the TiVo and the XBOX)
    3. If possible, try to connect TWO devices via the bridge, with your Linksys used as a switch in VERY close proximity to the main router (your PC and XBOX should be easy to manage). Both wired. This will ensure interference at the distance/range you're using it at normally, isn't the culprit.

    Finally, not what you want to hear - this is a "Gaming adapter". Fancy packging and more limited firmware. IMHO you would have been better with the (less intentionally crippled, as I've discovered gaming adapters to be!) G810 instead. Can you exchange this at the point of purchase?
     
  5. Apr 8, 2005 #285 of 606
    wombat2010

    wombat2010 New Member

    22
    0
    Apr 2, 2005
    Ashu,

    1. I have disabled Super-G on all devices (which for all I have read seems like little more than marketing hooey and a cause of more headaches than solutions).

    2. I will try inputting those settings. I didn't realize the DNS could be the router's IP address--thought it was something that had to be obtained from one's ISP, and I frankly ignored it b/c I didn't understand it. Query, though, whether the XBox or TiVo would be able to connect when plugged in alone, but not when plugged in with the other, based on this information not being entered? Nevertheless worth trying.

    3. I will try that, too, although getting them any closer will be difficult with my desktop upstairs from the other components. Maybe I'll scrounge around for some long CAT5.

    As far as the distinction between the gaming adapter (G820) and wireless bridge (G810), I did not realize that manufacturers supply crippleware with the former. I actually settled on the G820 after some debate, largely because comments I read in different places seemed to suggest the G810 had buggy firmware. Of course, the reality is probably that more people had had more time to complain about the G810 because it has been out longer. Very annoying that the gaming adapters are artificially limited in their firmware. Don't think I can return it, though--Newegg is good with returns, but I've had it for months. ;-)

    We'll see what happens tonight. What do you think about the possibility, as raised by CrispyCritter, that the problem really is with my router? Perhaps a switch that can auto-detect uplinks an all ports (rather than just on one, designated port, as is the case with my Linksys) would solve my problems. Danke once again.
     
  6. Apr 8, 2005 #286 of 606
    rog

    rog urban achiever

    794
    0
    Jan 12, 2005
    Oregon
    :confused: The gateway should be the router's IP, correct. But the DNS? That doesn't make any sense.

    wombat, you are correct. DNS servers reside at the ISP, and you'll always need to use the ISP's DNS servers on all your devices.

    I think ashu must have made a typo, or just meant something else. Your router will NOT act as a DNS server.
     
  7. Apr 8, 2005 #287 of 606
    Stormspace

    Stormspace Electrocuted by TiVo

    5,171
    0
    Apr 13, 2004
    Hartsville, SC
    If you use DHCP you shouldn't have to do anything to the TiVo but set it to obtain an IP automatically.
     
  8. Apr 8, 2005 #288 of 606
    wombat2010

    wombat2010 New Member

    22
    0
    Apr 2, 2005
    I am beginning to think my problem is due to a hardware limitation, possibly with my Linksys router (acting as switch) not having auto-detecting uplink capabilities on all ports. To attempt to rule out the wireless gaming adapter (G820) as the culprit, I will configure and hook up a Linksys wireless bridge I have (WET11--it's 802.11b and works fine with my wireless-g router) and see if I have the same problems.

    I'll also try entering gateways and such, but since the TiVo OR the XBox OR my laptop can connect fine when connected alone, I don't think it's a problem with something like that. It seems like DHCP should work or not, regardless of whether other devices are connected to the switch (unless the switch is limiting things, which is why I will try getting a new switch).

    Any recommended switches that anyone here has used successfully? Based on reading switch descriptions, it is difficult to tell whether a switch has auto-detecting uplink capabilities.
     
  9. Apr 8, 2005 #289 of 606
    ashu

    ashu User title defunct

    9,158
    0
    Nov 8, 2002
    MD
    Routers will forward DNS. When set to DHCP, (I'm quite sure) my devices pick up the router's IP as their DHCP server, Gateway AND DNS! Or am I missing something?

    Of course, in a more managed network, where the router is aLinux box with two interfaces and running IPChains firewalls, NAT in software etc - setting its IP as DNS would be silly *unless* you also ran a DNS service on it ;)
     
  10. Apr 8, 2005 #290 of 606
    rog

    rog urban achiever

    794
    0
    Jan 12, 2005
    Oregon
    So, you are basically saying the (consumer grade) "router" is acting as a DNS proxy of sorts? This is the scenario I think you are describing: Clients set their DNS server equal to the IP of the router. When they make a DNS query to that router, the router in turn passes (or proxies) that request onto the real DNS server at the ISP, then hands the DNS response back to the client.

    Well, I suppose it's theoretically possible. But...

    1) Why would that ever be necessary? The router is just using the ISP's DNS servers anyway.

    2) With DHCP being the usual configuration scenario, and thus, the DHCP server able to tell the clients what the ISP's DNS servers are, why bother with a DNS proxy?

    3) I've never seen it. My Linksys router certainly does NOT do this. I use static IP's normally, but when I do turn DHCP on, it always hands the client devices the real IP's of the DNS servers at the ISP, and it never would tell the client to use the IP of the router for DNS.

    4) Adding a DNS proxy to a consumer-level device would add cost that would be passed on to the consumer. Might I add, a completely needless cost.

    Anyway, I digress and we're getting off topic. But I see no reason to not go with the standard tried-and-true method of using your ISP's DNS servers on every device.
     
  11. Apr 8, 2005 #291 of 606
    ashu

    ashu User title defunct

    9,158
    0
    Nov 8, 2002
    MD
    Mere pass-through can be implemented as a rule in firmware ... not much cost there.

    The tried and true setting involves (the user or network configure-er) remembering the DNS, or a router that specifies it when a device requests a DHCP IP.

    Setting the DNS IP to be the router's IP is superior because it simplifies the steps/effort required to enable static IP!
     
  12. Apr 8, 2005 #292 of 606
    rog

    rog urban achiever

    794
    0
    Jan 12, 2005
    Oregon
    Although it's not quite as simple as a "mere pass through" (keep in mind, the router would effectively be doing network address translation to make a DNS proxy work), you are probably right in that it would be a software solution, and thus, it probably wouldn't add much cost to the router.

    I will admit I'm used to thinking in terms of business/enterprise networks.

    However, I still maintain my position that setting each client device to use the IP addresses of the ISP's DNS servers is the proper way.

    Or, just use DHCP on the clients and don't worry about DNS.

    After all, not all routers can/will pass DNS queries in the manner you describe. It's not a RFC standard, AFAIK.

    ----

    Moving along, I second your comments about game adapters. I think they are marketing-heavy and feature-thin. Not to mention needlessly overpriced!
     
  13. Apr 8, 2005 #293 of 606
    wombat2010

    wombat2010 New Member

    22
    0
    Apr 2, 2005
    Point well taken, and that's what I'll do, but in the event I do try entering the ISP's DNS server, is that information typically available through the ISP's web site?

    Yeah, total rip, and total marketing hooey for a crippleware product. I would have paid just as much for a plain vanilla wireless bridge, though it might have worked better.

    By the way, any recommended switches for auto-detecting uplinks that you mentioned earlier? I think that is what I'm going to try this weekend.
     
  14. Apr 8, 2005 #294 of 606
    pcar1947

    pcar1947 New Member

    43
    0
    Nov 12, 2003
    Atlanta
    I have been following these post with interest. I am one of the early adapters of the VIXJIM setup. I have been experiencing real-time transfers since feb 04. Of course I have experienced the pain of setting up the game adapters and the Dropping of transfers in mid stream . For the most part it's ok. However it seems you guys have come up with a new and improved wireless g transfer. Does anyone have a diagram of the improved setup? Are routers (WRT54G) replacing the Game Adapter? What does SVEASOFT do for me?

    I know these questions have been asked before but this thread has been going since 12-19-03 and I am confused.
     
  15. Apr 8, 2005 #295 of 606
    ashu

    ashu User title defunct

    9,158
    0
    Nov 8, 2002
    MD
    Routers that implement bridging (WDS) behave like a 'game adapter' or 'bridge' connected to a 4-port switch. They're more common, so they're often cheaper (Belkins for 5-15 after rebates, 45 for ALL 3 of my routers!)
     
  16. eibgrad

    eibgrad New Member

    119
    0
    Dec 11, 2004
    I started the ball rolling on the use of Belkin routers some months ago. I noticed at the time that the Belkin F5D7230-4 and F5F7231-4 routers support WDS (Wireless Distribution System), *PLUS*, they could be had cheap, often $10-20 AR (after rebate), or even FAR (free after rebate). Even picked up a router from Home Depot recently for $25 (price matched to Buy.com), w/ $40 rebate, so I made $15!

    The reason this situation is so compelling for use w/ Tivo is a) the routers support WDS, so they can be bridged, b) they're dirt cheap (compared to a dedicated wireless bridge or game adapter, easily $80 or more), and c), support for "G" protocol.

    So the basis of discussion in this forum has been to aquire these Belkin routers, configure them as APs (Access Point), and enable bridging. Thus, each Tivo can have its own dedicated AP. All it takes is adding a USB 2.0 ethernet adapter (e.g., D-Link DUB-E100), then patching it to the AP. Because all the wireless configuration lies outside the Tivo, it removes any limitations or restrictions on wireless imposed by Tivo (e.g., "b" only). You just want to make sure you use USB 2.0 ethernet adapters (as opposed to USB 1.1) to get the most bandwidth of the "G" protocol as possible.

    There are several configurations possible. Some people use one of the Belkin routers *as* a router, the other routers are reconfigured as AP w/ bridging enabled on all devices. The WDS support makes this possible, something not typically found on competitive brands at this same price level.

    In my case, I find the Belkin router, as a router, to be quite limited, doesn't provide all the features I'm come to expect w/ an advanced router, such as that found on my D-Link DI-624. Therefore, I've kept my DI-624 but disabled the wireless, then patched one of the Belkin routers in AP mode (and of course, bridging enabled) to the DI-624 w/ a simple ethernet patch cable. All other Belkin routers are also configured as APs w/ bridging enabled, but all these are patched to my Tivos. Of course, you can do the same thing w/ other network devices, like the family room PC, mom's laptop, whatever you like. IOW, I maintain the advantages of my DI-624 router (which doesn't support WDS, so it's not bridgeable), while gaining the advantages of the Belkin router's wireless WDS.

    However you configure it, the "big deal" in this forum regarding the Belkin routers is that they support WDS, can therefore be bridged w/ other Belkin "G" routers (and of course, dedicated Belkin APs), and for a fraction of the cost of buying dedicated APs, game adapters, etc. We're not doing anything here in this forum wrt these Belkin routers that you couldn't accomplish w/ other brand routers, BUT, you would be forced to buy expense, dedicated APs/bridges for this purpose.

    In my case, I've managed to aquire four (4) Belkin F5D7230-4 routers for a maybe $20 or so (after all rebates). No way, no how, can you build an equivalent distributed wireless system w/ the "G" protocol this cheaply EXCEPT w/ the Belkin line. As far as the SVEASOFT, some people are using this primarily to make the mediocre Belkin router, a better router. Since WDS is already supported, it doesn't have much more relevance to this discussion. In the case of Linksys, I believe SVEASOFT has *added* WDS support (don't hold me to that, I don't follow SVEASOFT advancements all that closely). In that case, it would obviously benefit the Linksys crowd, it would make Linksys capable of achieving the same thing, although you still can't beat the Belkin on pricing. Just beware that WDS, even when supported, is typically NOT interoperable across brands.

    I hope that clears up a few things, it's not really as complex once you see it in action, it's a lot harder to explain than actually execute. It's just that not everyone is aware of the WDS/bridging capability built into the Belkin routers, so people usually don't recognize how easy and cheaply they can dramatically improve their wireless network, and in this case, Tivo specifically.

    HTH

    eibgrad
     
  17. ashu

    ashu User title defunct

    9,158
    0
    Nov 8, 2002
    MD
    Thanks, great post. And thanks for mentioning the Belkins here ... I've lost count of how many friends have gone the 'Belkin Way' thanks to my preaching, over the last few months.

    And I've emphasised a part of your message, just to re-iterate it. Once I had channels and MAC's ironed out, the configuration on a per-edvice (TiVo, PCs, Networked Printer/Scanner etc.) is almost NIL!

    Ohh, and I also retained my D-Link 614+ as the 'main' router, and it also handles 802.11B duties, on a separate channel. The Belkins (all 3 of which cost less than the D-Link, combined!) operate in G-only mode.
     
  18. rog

    rog urban achiever

    794
    0
    Jan 12, 2005
    Oregon
    Great post man! You explained it very well. You nearly summed up the whole thread. This one deserves sticky status. :up:

    You mean your DLink router can host 11b on one channel and 11g on another? That's quite a router! I've never really tried any of the Belkin products (the fact that Linksys is made by Cisco has always been a big deciding factor for me), but I think I'll pick one of these up next time I see a good deal.
     
  19. eibgrad

    eibgrad New Member

    119
    0
    Dec 11, 2004
    Not quite.

    Remember, the DI-614+ is a “b” only router, whereas my DI-624 is a “b/g” router. What ashu has done is a slight twist on my configuration. If you recall, I disabled the wireless completely on my DI-624, thus all wireless clients, “b” and “g”, are supported over the Belkin router/AP, which is patched w/ ethernet cable to my DI-624. IOW, I maintain only ONE wireless network, supported completely by the Belkins.

    In ashu’s case, he’s decided to leave the DI-614+ wireless ENABLED, while also patching the Belkin router/AP to the DI-614+. In effect, ashu is maintaining TWO wireless networks. Although ashu hasn’t detailed why he did this, I can venture an educated guess.

    Using ashu’s configuration, he can maintain a separate “b” wireless network, perhaps for existing “b” clients, esp. if they employ D-Link client adapters. Meanwhile, he can keep all “g” traffic, perhaps all of it strictly Tivo, on a different wireless network. It’s NOT that the DI-614+ supports “b” clients on one channel and “g” clients on another channel, as you inferred from our earlier comments, rather, it’s that the DI-614+ supports “b” clients on one channel, and the ***Belkin router/AP*** supports “g” clients on another channel. Ultimately, all clients, be they wired, “b”, or “g”, end up on the DI-614+ for network services (DHCP, firewall, etc.).

    To complete the thought, ashu could go so far as to actively *exclude* 802.11b clients from using the Belkin wireless network by configuring the Belkin router/APs in “54-G Only” mode.

    Why all this fuss by ashu? Should be obvious, it increases the “available bandwidth” for all “b” and “g” clients, and thus potentially increasing throughput. Only thing he has to be careful about is avoiding/minimizing interference by using sufficient channel separation (both "b" and "g" use the same 2.4GHz band).

    eibgrad
     
  20. rog

    rog urban achiever

    794
    0
    Jan 12, 2005
    Oregon
    got it, thanks for splainin'.

    don't forget, ashu just likes playing with these things. ;) sounds like you and i have a similar infliction. it's best not to over-analyze it.
     

Share This Page