Cabling Problem Accessing Broadband Internet

Hi

I have a really wierd problem and wonder if someone can help please?

I have just gone to ADSL for the first time after our exchange was upgraded
last week.

Three months ago I purchased a Netgear DG834G Router and this has worked
perfectly in my network working just as a hub. My network consists of:-

1. Main PC - Cat5 connection
2. Wife's PC - Cat5 connection
3. Daughter's PC - Wireless connection
4. LapTop - To be Wireless in due course

In respect of 1 and 3 - no real problems have been experienced accessing the
internet, other than when someone is standing at the door of my daughter's
room, the wireless connection is lost lol!

However in respect of 2. I have found that cabling seems important if a
reliable and fast connection is to be made to the internet. I have three
cables, an old one that came with a 10mbps netgear hub, a long one which I
use periodically when working in different rooms and one I bought today.

Yesterday I could not get 2. to get on line and when I did, dsl.org's speed
test came out at 11kbps - worse than my old dialup!!! Eventually I found
that using the long cable, everything was restored to normal and the speed
test went up to 810kbps (approx the same as that reported by PC 1. above) -
I have a 1mbps connection with my ISP.

So this morning I bought another from a local shop thinking that the old
netgear one was past it. Putting the new one in put things back to where
they were - no connection or a truly slow one. Putting the long one back
and hey-presto back to normal again.

During all the cabling shuffling, I could access the network so the
different cables only affected internet access.

ADSL is a new area to me, but I would have thought that if the cable is good
enough for my 100mbps network, then it should be ok for ADSL - is this not
true?

The NIC in 2. is a netgear FA311 fast ethernet adapter PCI card. It is
correctly reporting a 100 mbps connection.

The only thing I can think of is the connectors at the end of the cables
which do not work are perhaps loose when inserted in the NIC whereas with
the longer cable the connector might be making a "better fit" - it seems the
same when you wiggle it about though.

This has me beat - I am reluctant to go back to the shop just yet for yet
another cable until I've exhausted all other areas, including a faulty NIC?

Has anyone had experience on this sort of thing?

The long cable is approx 15 meters long and works faultlessly, whereas the
two shorter ones are 5 meters long and are "playing up" - what gives?

TIA

Paul




Paul

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 16:31:39 -0000, "Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Netgear DG834G Router

No experience of this router but a some random thoughts for you to
consider.

CAT5e cabling can be purchased either as 'straight through' or
'crossover'; your service to the PCs should be using the 'straight
through' variety although some routers seem to be able to auto correct
if an inappropriate cable is used.

Sometimes one of the CAT5e outlets on the router has a micro switch
for you to manually select if you want that port to be for a crossover
or otherwise - if your router has that facility is the switch position
correct for your intended use of that port?

With a number of CAT5e cables available select a port on the router
and use each of the cales to the same PC; make a couple of piles for
the cables, those that work and those that don't. Could it be that
the non working cables are of the cross over variety?

If we assume that the IP address of the router is, say, 192.168.1.1
from the PC open a command window and type in:
ping -t 192.168.1.1 this will continually send small packets to the
router, if you pull out a cable, or have a none working one the
response will be 'request timed out' - you can re-insert the cable and
the ping statistics will be repeatly shown.

If you have an IP address that starts 192.168 then only in the most
unusual of circumtances would your sub net mask be anything other than
255.255.255.0 - make sure that every device on your home network is
the same. It is usually revelent that your WORKGROUP name is the same
for each PC and while there checking this fact change it away from the
default value - any word will do.

Hope this helps.

David Bradley

> In respect of 1 and 3 - no real problems have been experienced accessing the
> internet, other than when someone is standing at the door of my daughter's
> room, the wireless connection is lost lol!

You could make a fortune with that undocumented feature - boyfriend
collision detector :-}

--
Please add "[newsgroup]" in the subject of any personal replies via email
* old email address "btiruseless" abandoned due to worm-generated spam *
--- My new email address has "ngspamtrap" & @btinternet.com in it ;-) ---

Thanks David - lol! Colin - she's that age too with a BF who stays over !!!

Anyhow David - I know they are not cross-over cables - as I said in my post,
it's only the internet function that does not work, the Network usiing any
of the 3 cables can be accessed without problem.

As I have said this is a weird problem - why can I transfer files through
the network but yet not access the internet properly?

The router (192.168.0.1) can be accessed but problems with 2 of the 3
cables - sometimes it can be accessed sometimes not. Immediately after a
failure here I can immediately access anothe pc on the network!

As I have said David, my network is connected up correctly.

However I'm using Pipex. I have always assigned static IP addresses to my
networked PC's :-

1. 192.168.0.10
2. 192.168.0.2
3. 192.168.0.3
4. 192.162.0.4

In addition in my network settings I have assigned my Router as the
gateway - 192.168.0.1 and inserted the Primary and Secondary DNS Server
addresses given to me by Pipex.

When I tried to rig up my Windows98SE LapTop just now PC 4. above, I found
that I could insert the gateway address but nowhere could I find where to
insert the Primary and Secondary DNS Servers. There is a place under the
DNS tab, but it keeps bombing out saying I need to insert a DNS Server name
and I do not know what this is. Naturally I could not access the Internet -
A stop error results within Internet Explorer after a few seconds.

I know this is a secondary problem to my first but could they be related.
Years ago I was told to always assign IP addresses in this way to avoid
large bootup times whilst the PC searches for IP addresses and to avoid
compatability issues when networking machines with different OS's.

Pipex could not tell me whether to use the DNS server addresses or not,
despite them giving them to me! When trying to connect to the internet
without them inserted, I can not access any web pages with the usual
microsoft screen coming up after a minute or so.

Any further ideas?

TAIA

Paul

--------------------------------------------------------------------

This footnote confirms that this email message
has been swept by Norton AntiVirus for the
presence of computer viruses.

This computer is protected
by GIANT Company's Spam Inspector

---------------------------------------------------------------------


"Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:403787e9$0$3933$(E-Mail Removed). ..
> Hi
>
> I have a really wierd problem and wonder if someone can help please?
>
> I have just gone to ADSL for the first time after our exchange was
upgraded
> last week.
>
> Three months ago I purchased a Netgear DG834G Router and this has worked
> perfectly in my network working just as a hub. My network consists of:-
>
> 1. Main PC - Cat5 connection
> 2. Wife's PC - Cat5 connection
> 3. Daughter's PC - Wireless connection
> 4. LapTop - To be Wireless in due course
>
> In respect of 1 and 3 - no real problems have been experienced accessing
the
> internet, other than when someone is standing at the door of my daughter's
> room, the wireless connection is lost lol!
>
> However in respect of 2. I have found that cabling seems important if a
> reliable and fast connection is to be made to the internet. I have three
> cables, an old one that came with a 10mbps netgear hub, a long one which I
> use periodically when working in different rooms and one I bought today.
>
> Yesterday I could not get 2. to get on line and when I did, dsl.org's
speed
> test came out at 11kbps - worse than my old dialup!!! Eventually I found
> that using the long cable, everything was restored to normal and the speed
> test went up to 810kbps (approx the same as that reported by PC 1.
above) -
> I have a 1mbps connection with my ISP.
>
> So this morning I bought another from a local shop thinking that the old
> netgear one was past it. Putting the new one in put things back to where
> they were - no connection or a truly slow one. Putting the long one back
> and hey-presto back to normal again.
>
> During all the cabling shuffling, I could access the network so the
> different cables only affected internet access.
>
> ADSL is a new area to me, but I would have thought that if the cable is
good
> enough for my 100mbps network, then it should be ok for ADSL - is this not
> true?
>
> The NIC in 2. is a netgear FA311 fast ethernet adapter PCI card. It is
> correctly reporting a 100 mbps connection.
>
> The only thing I can think of is the connectors at the end of the cables
> which do not work are perhaps loose when inserted in the NIC whereas with
> the longer cable the connector might be making a "better fit" - it seems
the
> same when you wiggle it about though.
>
> This has me beat - I am reluctant to go back to the shop just yet for yet
> another cable until I've exhausted all other areas, including a faulty
NIC?
>
> Has anyone had experience on this sort of thing?
>
> The long cable is approx 15 meters long and works faultlessly, whereas the
> two shorter ones are 5 meters long and are "playing up" - what gives?
>
> TIA
>
> Paul
>
>

A thought is going through my mind, but not sure that I can give it a
logical explanation.
When the internet works - i.e. with the short cable - have you got all the
other computers connected?
Also it is usual to leave the .1 IP address unused; to assign .2 to the
router and then .3 upwards to the other computers - suggest the you try that
as perhaps it is an interaction between your local IP allocations and the
number of computers.

Chris


"Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:4037a703$0$3942$(E-Mail Removed). ..
> Thanks David - lol! Colin - she's that age too with a BF who stays over
!!!
>
> Anyhow David - I know they are not cross-over cables - as I said in my
post,
> it's only the internet function that does not work, the Network usiing any
> of the 3 cables can be accessed without problem.
>
> As I have said this is a weird problem - why can I transfer files through
> the network but yet not access the internet properly?
>
> The router (192.168.0.1) can be accessed but problems with 2 of the 3
> cables - sometimes it can be accessed sometimes not. Immediately after a
> failure here I can immediately access anothe pc on the network!
>
> As I have said David, my network is connected up correctly.
>
> However I'm using Pipex. I have always assigned static IP addresses to my
> networked PC's :-
>
> 1. 192.168.0.10
> 2. 192.168.0.2
> 3. 192.168.0.3
> 4. 192.162.0.4
>
> In addition in my network settings I have assigned my Router as the
> gateway - 192.168.0.1 and inserted the Primary and Secondary DNS Server
> addresses given to me by Pipex.
>
> When I tried to rig up my Windows98SE LapTop just now PC 4. above, I found
> that I could insert the gateway address but nowhere could I find where to
> insert the Primary and Secondary DNS Servers. There is a place under the
> DNS tab, but it keeps bombing out saying I need to insert a DNS Server
name
> and I do not know what this is. Naturally I could not access the
Internet -
> A stop error results within Internet Explorer after a few seconds.
>
> I know this is a secondary problem to my first but could they be related.
> Years ago I was told to always assign IP addresses in this way to avoid
> large bootup times whilst the PC searches for IP addresses and to avoid
> compatability issues when networking machines with different OS's.
>
> Pipex could not tell me whether to use the DNS server addresses or not,
> despite them giving them to me! When trying to connect to the internet
> without them inserted, I can not access any web pages with the usual
> microsoft screen coming up after a minute or so.
>
> Any further ideas?
>
> TAIA
>
> Paul
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This footnote confirms that this email message
> has been swept by Norton AntiVirus for the
> presence of computer viruses.
>
> This computer is protected
> by GIANT Company's Spam Inspector
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> "Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:403787e9$0$3933$(E-Mail Removed). ..
> > Hi
> >
> > I have a really wierd problem and wonder if someone can help please?
> >
> > I have just gone to ADSL for the first time after our exchange was
> upgraded
> > last week.
> >
> > Three months ago I purchased a Netgear DG834G Router and this has worked
> > perfectly in my network working just as a hub. My network consists of:-
> >
> > 1. Main PC - Cat5 connection
> > 2. Wife's PC - Cat5 connection
> > 3. Daughter's PC - Wireless connection
> > 4. LapTop - To be Wireless in due course
> >
> > In respect of 1 and 3 - no real problems have been experienced accessing
> the
> > internet, other than when someone is standing at the door of my
daughter's
> > room, the wireless connection is lost lol!
> >
> > However in respect of 2. I have found that cabling seems important if a
> > reliable and fast connection is to be made to the internet. I have
three
> > cables, an old one that came with a 10mbps netgear hub, a long one which
I
> > use periodically when working in different rooms and one I bought today.
> >
> > Yesterday I could not get 2. to get on line and when I did, dsl.org's
> speed
> > test came out at 11kbps - worse than my old dialup!!! Eventually I
found
> > that using the long cable, everything was restored to normal and the
speed
> > test went up to 810kbps (approx the same as that reported by PC 1.
> above) -
> > I have a 1mbps connection with my ISP.
> >
> > So this morning I bought another from a local shop thinking that the old
> > netgear one was past it. Putting the new one in put things back to
where
> > they were - no connection or a truly slow one. Putting the long one
back
> > and hey-presto back to normal again.
> >
> > During all the cabling shuffling, I could access the network so the
> > different cables only affected internet access.
> >
> > ADSL is a new area to me, but I would have thought that if the cable is
> good
> > enough for my 100mbps network, then it should be ok for ADSL - is this
not
> > true?
> >
> > The NIC in 2. is a netgear FA311 fast ethernet adapter PCI card. It is
> > correctly reporting a 100 mbps connection.
> >
> > The only thing I can think of is the connectors at the end of the cables
> > which do not work are perhaps loose when inserted in the NIC whereas
with
> > the longer cable the connector might be making a "better fit" - it seems
> the
> > same when you wiggle it about though.
> >
> > This has me beat - I am reluctant to go back to the shop just yet for
yet
> > another cable until I've exhausted all other areas, including a faulty
> NIC?
> >
> > Has anyone had experience on this sort of thing?
> >
> > The long cable is approx 15 meters long and works faultlessly, whereas
the
> > two shorter ones are 5 meters long and are "playing up" - what gives?
> >
> > TIA
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
>
>

Thanks Chris - I'll give it a go, renaming the IP addresses, but evryone
including Netgear themselves recommends giving the router the IP address I
have. This afternoon when sorting the cabling PC's 1,2 and 3 were on - 1 &
3 working no problem. Does this clarify what you were thinking or not?

Paul



"Chris Watts" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:PYNZb.9121$Y%(E-Mail Removed)...
> A thought is going through my mind, but not sure that I can give it a
> logical explanation.
> When the internet works - i.e. with the short cable - have you got all the
> other computers connected?
> Also it is usual to leave the .1 IP address unused; to assign .2 to the
> router and then .3 upwards to the other computers - suggest the you try
that
> as perhaps it is an interaction between your local IP allocations and the
> number of computers.
>
> Chris
>
>
> "Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:4037a703$0$3942$(E-Mail Removed). ..
> > Thanks David - lol! Colin - she's that age too with a BF who stays over
> !!!
> >
> > Anyhow David - I know they are not cross-over cables - as I said in my
> post,
> > it's only the internet function that does not work, the Network usiing
any
> > of the 3 cables can be accessed without problem.
> >
> > As I have said this is a weird problem - why can I transfer files
through
> > the network but yet not access the internet properly?
> >
> > The router (192.168.0.1) can be accessed but problems with 2 of the 3
> > cables - sometimes it can be accessed sometimes not. Immediately after
a
> > failure here I can immediately access anothe pc on the network!
> >
> > As I have said David, my network is connected up correctly.
> >
> > However I'm using Pipex. I have always assigned static IP addresses to
my
> > networked PC's :-
> >
> > 1. 192.168.0.10
> > 2. 192.168.0.2
> > 3. 192.168.0.3
> > 4. 192.162.0.4
> >
> > In addition in my network settings I have assigned my Router as the
> > gateway - 192.168.0.1 and inserted the Primary and Secondary DNS Server
> > addresses given to me by Pipex.
> >
> > When I tried to rig up my Windows98SE LapTop just now PC 4. above, I
found
> > that I could insert the gateway address but nowhere could I find where
to
> > insert the Primary and Secondary DNS Servers. There is a place under
the
> > DNS tab, but it keeps bombing out saying I need to insert a DNS Server
> name
> > and I do not know what this is. Naturally I could not access the
> Internet -
> > A stop error results within Internet Explorer after a few seconds.
> >
> > I know this is a secondary problem to my first but could they be
related.
> > Years ago I was told to always assign IP addresses in this way to avoid
> > large bootup times whilst the PC searches for IP addresses and to avoid
> > compatability issues when networking machines with different OS's.
> >
> > Pipex could not tell me whether to use the DNS server addresses or not,
> > despite them giving them to me! When trying to connect to the internet
> > without them inserted, I can not access any web pages with the usual
> > microsoft screen coming up after a minute or so.
> >
> > Any further ideas?
> >
> > TAIA
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > This footnote confirms that this email message
> > has been swept by Norton AntiVirus for the
> > presence of computer viruses.
> >
> > This computer is protected
> > by GIANT Company's Spam Inspector
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > "Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:403787e9$0$3933$(E-Mail Removed). ..
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > I have a really wierd problem and wonder if someone can help please?
> > >
> > > I have just gone to ADSL for the first time after our exchange was
> > upgraded
> > > last week.
> > >
> > > Three months ago I purchased a Netgear DG834G Router and this has
worked
> > > perfectly in my network working just as a hub. My network consists
of:-
> > >
> > > 1. Main PC - Cat5 connection
> > > 2. Wife's PC - Cat5 connection
> > > 3. Daughter's PC - Wireless connection
> > > 4. LapTop - To be Wireless in due course
> > >
> > > In respect of 1 and 3 - no real problems have been experienced
accessing
> > the
> > > internet, other than when someone is standing at the door of my
> daughter's
> > > room, the wireless connection is lost lol!
> > >
> > > However in respect of 2. I have found that cabling seems important if
a
> > > reliable and fast connection is to be made to the internet. I have
> three
> > > cables, an old one that came with a 10mbps netgear hub, a long one
which
> I
> > > use periodically when working in different rooms and one I bought
today.
> > >
> > > Yesterday I could not get 2. to get on line and when I did, dsl.org's
> > speed
> > > test came out at 11kbps - worse than my old dialup!!! Eventually I
> found
> > > that using the long cable, everything was restored to normal and the
> speed
> > > test went up to 810kbps (approx the same as that reported by PC 1.
> > above) -
> > > I have a 1mbps connection with my ISP.
> > >
> > > So this morning I bought another from a local shop thinking that the
old
> > > netgear one was past it. Putting the new one in put things back to
> where
> > > they were - no connection or a truly slow one. Putting the long one
> back
> > > and hey-presto back to normal again.
> > >
> > > During all the cabling shuffling, I could access the network so the
> > > different cables only affected internet access.
> > >
> > > ADSL is a new area to me, but I would have thought that if the cable
is
> > good
> > > enough for my 100mbps network, then it should be ok for ADSL - is this
> not
> > > true?
> > >
> > > The NIC in 2. is a netgear FA311 fast ethernet adapter PCI card. It
is
> > > correctly reporting a 100 mbps connection.
> > >
> > > The only thing I can think of is the connectors at the end of the
cables
> > > which do not work are perhaps loose when inserted in the NIC whereas
> with
> > > the longer cable the connector might be making a "better fit" - it
seems
> > the
> > > same when you wiggle it about though.
> > >
> > > This has me beat - I am reluctant to go back to the shop just yet for
> yet
> > > another cable until I've exhausted all other areas, including a faulty
> > NIC?
> > >
> > > Has anyone had experience on this sort of thing?
> > >
> > > The long cable is approx 15 meters long and works faultlessly, whereas
> the
> > > two shorter ones are 5 meters long and are "playing up" - what gives?
> > >
> > > TIA
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

"Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message

> However in respect of 2. I have found that cabling seems important if a
> reliable and fast connection is to be made to the internet. I have three
> cables, an old one that came with a 10mbps netgear hub, a long one which I
> use periodically when working in different rooms and one I bought today.

It may be worth setting this PC's NIC to10Mb half-duplex and testing to see
if it makes any difference. Maybe it's a weird autosensing issue.

Jc.

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 18:43:50 -0000, "Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Thanks David - lol! Colin - she's that age too with a BF who stays over !!!
>
>Anyhow David - I know they are not cross-over cables - as I said in my post,
>it's only the internet function that does not work, the Network usiing any
>of the 3 cables can be accessed without problem.

What do you actually mean when you say "internet function that does
not work"; I could assume you mean that when you type an address in
your browser, such as www.bbc.co.uk, the site does not come up but
let's suppose you open a command window and requested a ping to
212.58.234.115 - do you get a response or 'request timed out'?

Knowing the answer to this and a different diagnostic approach
applies.
>
>As I have said this is a weird problem - why can I transfer files through
>the network but yet not access the internet properly?

You say transfer files through the network, is that betwen computers
on your home network or between a PC at home and another Internect
connected PC several miles away?
>
>The router (192.168.0.1) can be accessed but problems with 2 of the 3
>cables - sometimes it can be accessed sometimes not. Immediately after a
>failure here I can immediately access anothe pc on the network!

You say the router can be accessed, I assume you mean from all the
machines in your home and not externally via the Internet? By access
a simple ping response would confirm that all is OK.
>
>As I have said David, my network is connected up correctly.

Until we know the answers to the questions above we could not possible
comment whether IMHO your network was connected up correctly with the
software configured as it should be.
>
>However I'm using Pipex. I have always assigned static IP addresses to my
>networked PC's :-
>
>1. 192.168.0.10
>2. 192.168.0.2
>3. 192.168.0.3
>4. 192.162.0.4

Nothing wrong with static IP addresses although I would make the
router 1 and not 10, but that's just the way I work. For #4 I think
you have made a typo as it should be 192.168.0.4
>
>In addition in my network settings I have assigned my Router as the
>gateway - 192.168.0.1 and inserted the Primary and Secondary DNS Server
>addresses given to me by Pipex.

Now this is interesting, one minute you say the router is 10 and now
we see it is 1, do we have a mismatch here or a typo? I assume you
entered the DNS IPs in the router, IMHO, this does not populate the
network PCs unless you select on each PC "Obtain DNS server address
automatically".
>
>When I tried to rig up my Windows98SE LapTop just now PC 4. above, I found
>that I could insert the gateway address but nowhere could I find where to
>insert the Primary and Secondary DNS Servers. There is a place under the
>DNS tab, but it keeps bombing out saying I need to insert a DNS Server name
>and I do not know what this is. Naturally I could not access the Internet -
>A stop error results within Internet Explorer after a few seconds.
>
Perhaps it would be better if you took the easier route of obtaining
the IP and DNS addresses automatically. If there was a need for some
static addresses there is nothing to stop you from a mixing the two
systems.

>I know this is a secondary problem to my first but could they be related.
>Years ago I was told to always assign IP addresses in this way to avoid
>large bootup times whilst the PC searches for IP addresses and to avoid
>compatability issues when networking machines with different OS's.
>
You have not said that you have a mixed OS set up so why have
un-necessary hassel, just go with DHCP.

>Pipex could not tell me whether to use the DNS server addresses or not,
>despite them giving them to me! When trying to connect to the internet
>without them inserted, I can not access any web pages with the usual
>microsoft screen coming up after a minute or so.

If you have a single computer connected to the Internet than you
probable don't have to enter DNS server information but haveing a
router on your network it is probably a necessity either in the router
or on each PC.
>
>Any further ideas?

Yes, on each PC type in ipconfig /all in a command window to ensure
that the PC has the right IP address with a subnet mask of
255.255.255.0 and that there are IP addresses for the Default Gateway
and DHCP server that match the address of your router. I would be
surprised if your Internet connection from the PC worked correctly if
no DNS Server IP addresses were shown. And if you insist on using
fixed IP addresses, make sure that on your internat network each piece
of equipment has its own exclusive IP address.

Get this lot right and you will be cooking on gas..........

DAVID BRADLEY
>
>TAIA
>
>Paul
>

>
>
>"Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:403787e9$0$3933$(E-Mail Removed) ...
>> Hi
>>
>> I have a really wierd problem and wonder if someone can help please?
>>
>> I have just gone to ADSL for the first time after our exchange was
>upgraded
>> last week.
>>
>> Three months ago I purchased a Netgear DG834G Router and this has worked
>> perfectly in my network working just as a hub. My network consists of:-
>>
>> 1. Main PC - Cat5 connection
>> 2. Wife's PC - Cat5 connection
>> 3. Daughter's PC - Wireless connection
>> 4. LapTop - To be Wireless in due course
>>
>> In respect of 1 and 3 - no real problems have been experienced accessing
>the
>> internet, other than when someone is standing at the door of my daughter's
>> room, the wireless connection is lost lol!
>>
>> However in respect of 2. I have found that cabling seems important if a
>> reliable and fast connection is to be made to the internet. I have three
>> cables, an old one that came with a 10mbps netgear hub, a long one which I
>> use periodically when working in different rooms and one I bought today.
>>
>> Yesterday I could not get 2. to get on line and when I did, dsl.org's
>speed
>> test came out at 11kbps - worse than my old dialup!!! Eventually I found
>> that using the long cable, everything was restored to normal and the speed
>> test went up to 810kbps (approx the same as that reported by PC 1.
>above) -
>> I have a 1mbps connection with my ISP.
>>
>> So this morning I bought another from a local shop thinking that the old
>> netgear one was past it. Putting the new one in put things back to where
>> they were - no connection or a truly slow one. Putting the long one back
>> and hey-presto back to normal again.
>>
>> During all the cabling shuffling, I could access the network so the
>> different cables only affected internet access.
>>
>> ADSL is a new area to me, but I would have thought that if the cable is
>good
>> enough for my 100mbps network, then it should be ok for ADSL - is this not
>> true?
>>
>> The NIC in 2. is a netgear FA311 fast ethernet adapter PCI card. It is
>> correctly reporting a 100 mbps connection.
>>
>> The only thing I can think of is the connectors at the end of the cables
>> which do not work are perhaps loose when inserted in the NIC whereas with
>> the longer cable the connector might be making a "better fit" - it seems
>the
>> same when you wiggle it about though.
>>
>> This has me beat - I am reluctant to go back to the shop just yet for yet
>> another cable until I've exhausted all other areas, including a faulty
>NIC?
>>
>> Has anyone had experience on this sort of thing?
>>
>> The long cable is approx 15 meters long and works faultlessly, whereas the
>> two shorter ones are 5 meters long and are "playing up" - what gives?
>>
>> TIA
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>

Thanks David for going to the trouble of going through everything with a
fine tooth comb - hopefully my answers to your questions may reveal
something wrong. Before I start I would just say I found a fourth cat5
cable lying around in my loft and inserting this has revealed the same
problems as the two others, leaving only my longer cable working!!

First Sitting in front of my Wife's PC - PC2 - with one of the three
"non-working cables" plugged in to the router - by Internet function I
mean, as you have surmised, typing www.bbc.co.uk either does not bring the
site up or it's extremely slow - much slower than dial up. Pinging
212.58.234.115 gives me "request timed out". Still working from PC 2, I
accessed the network of my home PC's - PC 1, PC 2 and PC 3 (PC 4 not
connected yet), brought up the Network - "PAULSNETWORK" - and quickly
revelaed the folder structure on PC 1. However trying to copy a small text
file from PC 1 to PC 2 almost froze Windows Explorer but after a few minutes
the program sprang to life again. Perhpas I was a little optimistic when I
said the network works fine - but why the folder structure but no file
transfer?

Second By saying transfering files through the network - I mean to and from
PC's 1, 2 and 3 - NOT between say PC 2 and another miles away - just within
my network "PAULSNETWORK".

Third Yes the Router can be accessed either by pinging it or by typing
http://192.168.0.1 in Internet Explorer. No problems whatsoever - pinging
gives me 4 packets sent and four packets received and none lost - the normal
when pinging, I think.

Fourth Lets clarify - My Network is set up as follows: -

Router 192.168.0.1
PC 1 192.168.0.10
PC 2 192.168.0.2
PC 3 192.168.0.3
PC 4 192.168.0.4 (not connected yet and a typo last post - sorry)

All are set with static addresses with the correct subnet mask of
255.255.255.0

All have the gateway address inserted as 192.168.0.1 and all have the DNS
Server addresses as Primary 158.43.240.4 and Secondary 158.43.240.3
inserted also - other than PC 4 as Windoes 98 SE is calling for server names
when trying to insert them - and I don't know them.

My Router has the DNS Server addresses populated as above too. - I agree
unless I select "Obtain DNS server address automatically" on each PC, this
will not populate each PC - see below - but then I prefer static addresses,
given the exeeedingly long bootup times experienced when mixing Windows 98
SE and Windows XP Pro OS's - yes at the moment PC 1, 2 and 3 are all XP
Pro - PC 4 - not set up yet but I want it to be - is 98 SE.

Could you explain "mixing the two systems" please - I thought all had to be
static or all automatic?

Fifth As stated I have inserted the DNS server information on both the
router and on each PC.

ipconfig /all reveals (from PC 2): -

-------------------------------------------------
Windows IP Configuration:

Host Name ruth02
Primary DNS Suffix this is blank
Node Unknown
IP Routing Enabled No
WINS Proxy Enabled No

Ethernet Adapter Local Area Connection:

Connection-Specific DNS Suffix this is blank
Description NETGEAR FA311 Fast
Ethernet Adapter
Physical Address 00-02-E3-21-46-C6
Dhcp Enabled No
IP Address 192.168.0.2
Subnet Mask 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway 192.168.0.1
DNS Servers 158.43.240.4
158.43.240.3
-------------------------------------------------

I have done this as you recommended and everything seems fine - the
addresses are inserted correctly as are the DNS server IP adreeses - the
only difference is that PC 1 is connected via a Network Bridge - "MAC Bridge
Miniport" is revealed in Network Connections - this always seems to be
installed and enabled if I start the Network settings from the beginning and
the TCP/IP Protocol is configured through that for PC 1. PC 1's ethernet
port is integrated in the M/B and is stated as being an "Intel(R) PRO/1000
CT Network Connection" in Network Connections.

I think I've answered all your questions David, but during the last hour
composing this I have had the cat5 cable from my loft plugged in and I've
periodically checked the connection from PC 2 only to confirm everything
stated above. Before signing off I have just replaced the cable with my
long one and this has revealed the following: -

Internet Speed (810 kbps via dsl.org's speed test) and Network fully
restored - network file transfer via PAULSNETWORK also fully restored.

Interestingly though pinging 212.58.234.115 still "TIMES OUT" - strange?
I'm not sure what this address is maybe you could explain.

Finally David, all this has obviously highlighted my lack of Networking
experience - I'm hoping that the above information might reveal something.

However at the moment I can not believe that only one of my cables - the
long one - works and the other three, one of which is brand new don't. FWIW
all the cables have the following printed on them: -

ETL verified TIA/EIA 568A-5 Category 5E UTP Patch Cable 4 Pairs 24AWG AWM
2835 30V 60degrees C E81280

Not sure if this is relevant but I know they aren't crossover ones - I have
one of those for connecting only two PC's together and that cable has the
word "crossover" printed on it. All three "non-working" cables are from
different manufacturers and the long one is from one of one of these three.

Hope you can help figure this all out

Thanks for taking an interest again M8

Paul




"David Bradley" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 18:43:50 -0000, "Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
> >Thanks David - lol! Colin - she's that age too with a BF who stays over
!!!
> >
> >Anyhow David - I know they are not cross-over cables - as I said in my
post,
> >it's only the internet function that does not work, the Network usiing
any
> >of the 3 cables can be accessed without problem.
>
> What do you actually mean when you say "internet function that does
> not work"; I could assume you mean that when you type an address in
> your browser, such as www.bbc.co.uk, the site does not come up but
> let's suppose you open a command window and requested a ping to
> 212.58.234.115 - do you get a response or 'request timed out'?
>
> Knowing the answer to this and a different diagnostic approach
> applies.
> >
> >As I have said this is a weird problem - why can I transfer files through
> >the network but yet not access the internet properly?
>
> You say transfer files through the network, is that betwen computers
> on your home network or between a PC at home and another Internect
> connected PC several miles away?
> >
> >The router (192.168.0.1) can be accessed but problems with 2 of the 3
> >cables - sometimes it can be accessed sometimes not. Immediately after a
> >failure here I can immediately access anothe pc on the network!
>
> You say the router can be accessed, I assume you mean from all the
> machines in your home and not externally via the Internet? By access
> a simple ping response would confirm that all is OK.
> >
> >As I have said David, my network is connected up correctly.
>
> Until we know the answers to the questions above we could not possible
> comment whether IMHO your network was connected up correctly with the
> software configured as it should be.
> >
> >However I'm using Pipex. I have always assigned static IP addresses to
my
> >networked PC's :-
> >
> >1. 192.168.0.10
> >2. 192.168.0.2
> >3. 192.168.0.3
> >4. 192.162.0.4
>
> Nothing wrong with static IP addresses although I would make the
> router 1 and not 10, but that's just the way I work. For #4 I think
> you have made a typo as it should be 192.168.0.4
> >
> >In addition in my network settings I have assigned my Router as the
> >gateway - 192.168.0.1 and inserted the Primary and Secondary DNS Server
> >addresses given to me by Pipex.
>
> Now this is interesting, one minute you say the router is 10 and now
> we see it is 1, do we have a mismatch here or a typo? I assume you
> entered the DNS IPs in the router, IMHO, this does not populate the
> network PCs unless you select on each PC "Obtain DNS server address
> automatically".
> >
> >When I tried to rig up my Windows98SE LapTop just now PC 4. above, I
found
> >that I could insert the gateway address but nowhere could I find where to
> >insert the Primary and Secondary DNS Servers. There is a place under the
> >DNS tab, but it keeps bombing out saying I need to insert a DNS Server
name
> >and I do not know what this is. Naturally I could not access the
Internet -
> >A stop error results within Internet Explorer after a few seconds.
> >
> Perhaps it would be better if you took the easier route of obtaining
> the IP and DNS addresses automatically. If there was a need for some
> static addresses there is nothing to stop you from a mixing the two
> systems.
>
> >I know this is a secondary problem to my first but could they be related.
> >Years ago I was told to always assign IP addresses in this way to avoid
> >large bootup times whilst the PC searches for IP addresses and to avoid
> >compatability issues when networking machines with different OS's.
> >
> You have not said that you have a mixed OS set up so why have
> un-necessary hassel, just go with DHCP.
>
> >Pipex could not tell me whether to use the DNS server addresses or not,
> >despite them giving them to me! When trying to connect to the internet
> >without them inserted, I can not access any web pages with the usual
> >microsoft screen coming up after a minute or so.
>
> If you have a single computer connected to the Internet than you
> probable don't have to enter DNS server information but haveing a
> router on your network it is probably a necessity either in the router
> or on each PC.
> >
> >Any further ideas?
>
> Yes, on each PC type in ipconfig /all in a command window to ensure
> that the PC has the right IP address with a subnet mask of
> 255.255.255.0 and that there are IP addresses for the Default Gateway
> and DHCP server that match the address of your router. I would be
> surprised if your Internet connection from the PC worked correctly if
> no DNS Server IP addresses were shown. And if you insist on using
> fixed IP addresses, make sure that on your internat network each piece
> of equipment has its own exclusive IP address.
>
> Get this lot right and you will be cooking on gas..........
>
> DAVID BRADLEY
> >
> >TAIA
> >
> >Paul
> >
>
> >
> >
> >"Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >news:403787e9$0$3933$(E-Mail Removed) ...
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> I have a really wierd problem and wonder if someone can help please?
> >>
> >> I have just gone to ADSL for the first time after our exchange was
> >upgraded
> >> last week.
> >>
> >> Three months ago I purchased a Netgear DG834G Router and this has
worked
> >> perfectly in my network working just as a hub. My network consists
of:-
> >>
> >> 1. Main PC - Cat5 connection
> >> 2. Wife's PC - Cat5 connection
> >> 3. Daughter's PC - Wireless connection
> >> 4. LapTop - To be Wireless in due course
> >>
> >> In respect of 1 and 3 - no real problems have been experienced
accessing
> >the
> >> internet, other than when someone is standing at the door of my
daughter's
> >> room, the wireless connection is lost lol!
> >>
> >> However in respect of 2. I have found that cabling seems important if
a
> >> reliable and fast connection is to be made to the internet. I have
three
> >> cables, an old one that came with a 10mbps netgear hub, a long one
which I
> >> use periodically when working in different rooms and one I bought
today.
> >>
> >> Yesterday I could not get 2. to get on line and when I did, dsl.org's
> >speed
> >> test came out at 11kbps - worse than my old dialup!!! Eventually I
found
> >> that using the long cable, everything was restored to normal and the
speed
> >> test went up to 810kbps (approx the same as that reported by PC 1.
> >above) -
> >> I have a 1mbps connection with my ISP.
> >>
> >> So this morning I bought another from a local shop thinking that the
old
> >> netgear one was past it. Putting the new one in put things back to
where
> >> they were - no connection or a truly slow one. Putting the long one
back
> >> and hey-presto back to normal again.
> >>
> >> During all the cabling shuffling, I could access the network so the
> >> different cables only affected internet access.
> >>
> >> ADSL is a new area to me, but I would have thought that if the cable is
> >good
> >> enough for my 100mbps network, then it should be ok for ADSL - is this
not
> >> true?
> >>
> >> The NIC in 2. is a netgear FA311 fast ethernet adapter PCI card. It is
> >> correctly reporting a 100 mbps connection.
> >>
> >> The only thing I can think of is the connectors at the end of the
cables
> >> which do not work are perhaps loose when inserted in the NIC whereas
with
> >> the longer cable the connector might be making a "better fit" - it
seems
> >the
> >> same when you wiggle it about though.
> >>
> >> This has me beat - I am reluctant to go back to the shop just yet for
yet
> >> another cable until I've exhausted all other areas, including a faulty
> >NIC?
> >>
> >> Has anyone had experience on this sort of thing?
> >>
> >> The long cable is approx 15 meters long and works faultlessly, whereas
the
> >> two shorter ones are 5 meters long and are "playing up" - what gives?
> >>
> >> TIA
> >>
> >> Paul
> >>
> >>
> >
>

Hello,

Your message is long so I thought I would slip a reply in at the top
so you did not miss it! Went looking for info on your router and
noticed this:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
How Do I Install It?

The Netgear DG834G has the easiest setup on the market. You will be
online in minutes. Just follow the web based setup wizard.
Easy-to-follow configuration instructions are provided to step you
through the process.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A week is a long time in politics so I suppose that Negear minutes is
the equivalent of a normal day! Still I digress so let's get down to
the nitty gritty.

You said "I thought all had to be static or all automatic"; nope you
can have both and often you have to and in a strange way this may be
the root of your problem. I suspect that out of the box the router
has a default IP of 192.168.0.1 so at least intially you have to have
one connected PC to the router with an IP address starting with
192.168.0 to get at the WEB based interface of the router for
configuration purposes and I suspect this was PC1 with an IP address
of 192.168.0.10

The router probably has a default setting where the start of the DHCP
range is 10 and with reserves addresses 1-9 for fixed IP use. I would
suggest to crack the problem you are having is to build on 'success'
before introducing another complication, so for starters disconnect
everything from the router except one PC. Set that PC for automatic
detection of both IP address and DNS Sservers.

Power down both and then turn on the router first, followed a couple
of minutes later with the PC. Assuming the router has been populated
with DNS addresses I suspect the rsponse to ipconfig /all will have in
there some lines that read:

Dhcp Enabled. . ....... . . . . . . . . : Yes
Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
IP Address. . . . . . . . . .......... . . : 192.168.0.10
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . ........ . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . ....... . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
DHCP Server . . . . ....... . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
DNS Servers . . . . . . ...... . . . . . : 158.43.240.4
158.43.240.3
Lease Obtained. . ..... . . . . . . . : 22 February 2004 07:35:13
Lease Expires . . . ......... . . . . . : 25 February 2004 07:35:13

the first three groups of numbers for the IP address, Default Gateway
and DHCP server must be the same, ie, 192.168.0 in this example. The
last group number of the IP address [10 in this example] must be
different to the Default Gateway and DHCP server; the Default Gateway
and DHCP server can have the same IP address.

I would not say that the DNS Server IPs ***have to be*** there but
there is extreem comfort is seeing them present. Check that these IP
addresses are indeed correct and that they are the latest ones
provided by your ISP.

A WEB based interface to the router should at this stage be possible.
Assuming you have entered your login information, and made other
changes to various settings as instructed in your welcoming letter
from you ISP, and that you are phsically connected from your router to
the telephone service then you should have a live ADSL service.
However it does not hurt to check out your physical telephone service
wiring to ensure that every analogue phone device is downstream of an
ADSL filter. It might help at this testing stage to disconnect all
analogue devices and their associated filters. You will probably need
to retain the filter that serves the router because of the cable you
have, but normally even that is not necessary.

At this stage I would tend to ping www.bbc.co.uk or its equivalent IP
address of 212.58.234.115 and until I got a satisfactory response
would not consider adding other PCs to the network If you can't get a
ping response would that be because you needed to open up the Netgear
firewall a tiny bit? If you can ping OK with the IP address but not
www.bbc,co.uk then we have a DNS problem. In that case is the
IPaddresses you are using right. If there is a ADSL filter in use
consider changing this for another make.

A route you could go down, if you have Internet connection problems,
would be to remove the faceplate of the master socket and use the
normally hidden outlet socket to get at your phone service, don't
worry unduly about using a long POTS extension lead if necessary to
connect to your router but for the purists point of view move the
router near to to master socket and use a long CAT5e cable to connect
to the PC.

You have got to get this simple set-up going before considering bring
anything else on board.

At this juncture you can consider an alternative IP address range such
as 192.168.27.xxx and in fact if you are ever going to get involved in
VPNs this is a desirable thing to do.

If all is working OK then set the next PC for auto detect and connect
this ONLY to the router using the same cabling as for the first PC. An
ipconfig /all response should be the same exceot that its IP address
should have incremented by 1 from the first PC, ie, 192.168.0.11 - run
through the same checks until you get satisfaction.

Repeat the steps for PCs 3 and 4. When all is OK connct just two PCs
to the router. Can each see get a web ite using the name alone
www.bbc.co.uk ? If not swap over the CAT5e cables. This will tell
you if any of the CAT5e cabls are duff. Remember there are some look
alike CAT5e cables out there that only have four cores connected - you
need all six. [An example of this sort of CAT5 look alike is that
used for connecting to a ISDN terminal adapter].

We are begining o cook on gas now and certainly there should be no
problem in pinging any PC on the internal network. However there is
one thing that does worry me and that is the number of characters in
your WORKGROUP name - could you not shorten this to PAULS

If at this stage all is orking OK you can reassamby the POTS network
and devices and then recheck your PC network. After all this you can
then, if you wish, habe some, or all, of your computers with a fixed
IP address. However the address you choose must be the same three
groups of IP numbers, ie 192.168.0 in this example and the last number
mut be lower than the start number issued by your router. Make sure
you do not duplicate any number and avoiid using 0 or 1. It goes
without saying that the subnet address remains as 255.255.255.0 for
your entire internal network.

Hope this helps

DAVID BRADLEY



On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 12:34:07 -0000, "Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Thanks David for going to the trouble of going through everything with a
>fine tooth comb - hopefully my answers to your questions may reveal
>something wrong. Before I start I would just say I found a fourth cat5
>cable lying around in my loft and inserting this has revealed the same
>problems as the two others, leaving only my longer cable working!!
>
>First Sitting in front of my Wife's PC - PC2 - with one of the three
>"non-working cables" plugged in to the router - by Internet function I
>mean, as you have surmised, typing www.bbc.co.uk either does not bring the
>site up or it's extremely slow - much slower than dial up. Pinging
>212.58.234.115 gives me "request timed out". Still working from PC 2, I
>accessed the network of my home PC's - PC 1, PC 2 and PC 3 (PC 4 not
>connected yet), brought up the Network - "PAULSNETWORK" - and quickly
>revelaed the folder structure on PC 1. However trying to copy a small text
>file from PC 1 to PC 2 almost froze Windows Explorer but after a few minutes
>the program sprang to life again. Perhpas I was a little optimistic when I
>said the network works fine - but why the folder structure but no file
>transfer?
>
>Second By saying transfering files through the network - I mean to and from
>PC's 1, 2 and 3 - NOT between say PC 2 and another miles away - just within
>my network "PAULSNETWORK".
>
>Third Yes the Router can be accessed either by pinging it or by typing
>http://192.168.0.1 in Internet Explorer. No problems whatsoever - pinging
>gives me 4 packets sent and four packets received and none lost - the normal
>when pinging, I think.
>
>Fourth Lets clarify - My Network is set up as follows: -
>
>Router 192.168.0.1
>PC 1 192.168.0.10
>PC 2 192.168.0.2
>PC 3 192.168.0.3
>PC 4 192.168.0.4 (not connected yet and a typo last post - sorry)
>
>All are set with static addresses with the correct subnet mask of
>255.255.255.0
>
>All have the gateway address inserted as 192.168.0.1 and all have the DNS
>Server addresses as Primary 158.43.240.4 and Secondary 158.43.240.3
>inserted also - other than PC 4 as Windoes 98 SE is calling for server names
>when trying to insert them - and I don't know them.
>
>My Router has the DNS Server addresses populated as above too. - I agree
>unless I select "Obtain DNS server address automatically" on each PC, this
>will not populate each PC - see below - but then I prefer static addresses,
>given the exeeedingly long bootup times experienced when mixing Windows 98
>SE and Windows XP Pro OS's - yes at the moment PC 1, 2 and 3 are all XP
>Pro - PC 4 - not set up yet but I want it to be - is 98 SE.
>
>Could you explain "mixing the two systems" please - I thought all had to be
>static or all automatic?
>
>Fifth As stated I have inserted the DNS server information on both the
>router and on each PC.
>
>ipconfig /all reveals (from PC 2): -
>
>-------------------------------------------------
>Windows IP Configuration:
>
>Host Name ruth02
>Primary DNS Suffix this is blank
>Node Unknown
>IP Routing Enabled No
>WINS Proxy Enabled No
>
>Ethernet Adapter Local Area Connection:
>
>Connection-Specific DNS Suffix this is blank
>Description NETGEAR FA311 Fast
>Ethernet Adapter
>Physical Address 00-02-E3-21-46-C6
>Dhcp Enabled No
>IP Address 192.168.0.2
>Subnet Mask 255.255.255.0
>Default Gateway 192.168.0.1
>DNS Servers 158.43.240.4
> 158.43.240.3
>-------------------------------------------------
>
>I have done this as you recommended and everything seems fine - the
>addresses are inserted correctly as are the DNS server IP adreeses - the
>only difference is that PC 1 is connected via a Network Bridge - "MAC Bridge
>Miniport" is revealed in Network Connections - this always seems to be
>installed and enabled if I start the Network settings from the beginning and
>the TCP/IP Protocol is configured through that for PC 1. PC 1's ethernet
>port is integrated in the M/B and is stated as being an "Intel(R) PRO/1000
>CT Network Connection" in Network Connections.
>
>I think I've answered all your questions David, but during the last hour
>composing this I have had the cat5 cable from my loft plugged in and I've
>periodically checked the connection from PC 2 only to confirm everything
>stated above. Before signing off I have just replaced the cable with my
>long one and this has revealed the following: -
>
>Internet Speed (810 kbps via dsl.org's speed test) and Network fully
>restored - network file transfer via PAULSNETWORK also fully restored.
>
>Interestingly though pinging 212.58.234.115 still "TIMES OUT" - strange?
>I'm not sure what this address is maybe you could explain.
>
>Finally David, all this has obviously highlighted my lack of Networking
>experience - I'm hoping that the above information might reveal something.
>
>However at the moment I can not believe that only one of my cables - the
>long one - works and the other three, one of which is brand new don't. FWIW
>all the cables have the following printed on them: -
>
>ETL verified TIA/EIA 568A-5 Category 5E UTP Patch Cable 4 Pairs 24AWG AWM
>2835 30V 60degrees C E81280
>
>Not sure if this is relevant but I know they aren't crossover ones - I have
>one of those for connecting only two PC's together and that cable has the
>word "crossover" printed on it. All three "non-working" cables are from
>different manufacturers and the long one is from one of one of these three.
>
>Hope you can help figure this all out
>
>Thanks for taking an interest again M8
>
>Paul
>
>
>
>
>"David Bradley" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 18:43:50 -0000, "Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Thanks David - lol! Colin - she's that age too with a BF who stays over
>!!!
>> >
>> >Anyhow David - I know they are not cross-over cables - as I said in my
>post,
>> >it's only the internet function that does not work, the Network usiing
>any
>> >of the 3 cables can be accessed without problem.
>>
>> What do you actually mean when you say "internet function that does
>> not work"; I could assume you mean that when you type an address in
>> your browser, such as www.bbc.co.uk, the site does not come up but
>> let's suppose you open a command window and requested a ping to
>> 212.58.234.115 - do you get a response or 'request timed out'?
>>
>> Knowing the answer to this and a different diagnostic approach
>> applies.
>> >
>> >As I have said this is a weird problem - why can I transfer files through
>> >the network but yet not access the internet properly?
>>
>> You say transfer files through the network, is that betwen computers
>> on your home network or between a PC at home and another Internect
>> connected PC several miles away?
>> >
>> >The router (192.168.0.1) can be accessed but problems with 2 of the 3
>> >cables - sometimes it can be accessed sometimes not. Immediately after a
>> >failure here I can immediately access anothe pc on the network!
>>
>> You say the router can be accessed, I assume you mean from all the
>> machines in your home and not externally via the Internet? By access
>> a simple ping response would confirm that all is OK.
>> >
>> >As I have said David, my network is connected up correctly.
>>
>> Until we know the answers to the questions above we could not possible
>> comment whether IMHO your network was connected up correctly with the
>> software configured as it should be.
>> >
>> >However I'm using Pipex. I have always assigned static IP addresses to
>my
>> >networked PC's :-
>> >
>> >1. 192.168.0.10
>> >2. 192.168.0.2
>> >3. 192.168.0.3
>> >4. 192.162.0.4
>>
>> Nothing wrong with static IP addresses although I would make the
>> router 1 and not 10, but that's just the way I work. For #4 I think
>> you have made a typo as it should be 192.168.0.4
>> >
>> >In addition in my network settings I have assigned my Router as the
>> >gateway - 192.168.0.1 and inserted the Primary and Secondary DNS Server
>> >addresses given to me by Pipex.
>>
>> Now this is interesting, one minute you say the router is 10 and now
>> we see it is 1, do we have a mismatch here or a typo? I assume you
>> entered the DNS IPs in the router, IMHO, this does not populate the
>> network PCs unless you select on each PC "Obtain DNS server address
>> automatically".
>> >
>> >When I tried to rig up my Windows98SE LapTop just now PC 4. above, I
>found
>> >that I could insert the gateway address but nowhere could I find where to
>> >insert the Primary and Secondary DNS Servers. There is a place under the
>> >DNS tab, but it keeps bombing out saying I need to insert a DNS Server
>name
>> >and I do not know what this is. Naturally I could not access the
>Internet -
>> >A stop error results within Internet Explorer after a few seconds.
>> >
>> Perhaps it would be better if you took the easier route of obtaining
>> the IP and DNS addresses automatically. If there was a need for some
>> static addresses there is nothing to stop you from a mixing the two
>> systems.
>>
>> >I know this is a secondary problem to my first but could they be related.
>> >Years ago I was told to always assign IP addresses in this way to avoid
>> >large bootup times whilst the PC searches for IP addresses and to avoid
>> >compatability issues when networking machines with different OS's.
>> >
>> You have not said that you have a mixed OS set up so why have
>> un-necessary hassel, just go with DHCP.
>>
>> >Pipex could not tell me whether to use the DNS server addresses or not,
>> >despite them giving them to me! When trying to connect to the internet
>> >without them inserted, I can not access any web pages with the usual
>> >microsoft screen coming up after a minute or so.
>>
>> If you have a single computer connected to the Internet than you
>> probable don't have to enter DNS server information but haveing a
>> router on your network it is probably a necessity either in the router
>> or on each PC.
>> >
>> >Any further ideas?
>>
>> Yes, on each PC type in ipconfig /all in a command window to ensure
>> that the PC has the right IP address with a subnet mask of
>> 255.255.255.0 and that there are IP addresses for the Default Gateway
>> and DHCP server that match the address of your router. I would be
>> surprised if your Internet connection from the PC worked correctly if
>> no DNS Server IP addresses were shown. And if you insist on using
>> fixed IP addresses, make sure that on your internat network each piece
>> of equipment has its own exclusive IP address.
>>
>> Get this lot right and you will be cooking on gas..........
>>
>> DAVID BRADLEY
>> >
>> >TAIA
>> >
>> >Paul
>> >
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >"Paul" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> >news:403787e9$0$3933$(E-Mail Removed) ...
>> >> Hi
>> >>
>> >> I have a really wierd problem and wonder if someone can help please?
>> >>
>> >> I have just gone to ADSL for the first time after our exchange was
>> >upgraded
>> >> last week.
>> >>
>> >> Three months ago I purchased a Netgear DG834G Router and this has
>worked
>> >> perfectly in my network working just as a hub. My network consists
>of:-
>> >>
>> >> 1. Main PC - Cat5 connection
>> >> 2. Wife's PC - Cat5 connection
>> >> 3. Daughter's PC - Wireless connection
>> >> 4. LapTop - To be Wireless in due course
>> >>
>> >> In respect of 1 and 3 - no real problems have been experienced
>accessing
>> >the
>> >> internet, other than when someone is standing at the door of my
>daughter's
>> >> room, the wireless connection is lost lol!
>> >>
>> >> However in respect of 2. I have found that cabling seems important if
>a
>> >> reliable and fast connection is to be made to the internet. I have
>three
>> >> cables, an old one that came with a 10mbps netgear hub, a long one
>which I
>> >> use periodically when working in different rooms and one I bought
>today.
>> >>
>> >> Yesterday I could not get 2. to get on line and when I did, dsl.org's
>> >speed
>> >> test came out at 11kbps - worse than my old dialup!!! Eventually I
>found
>> >> that using the long cable, everything was restored to normal and the
>speed
>> >> test went up to 810kbps (approx the same as that reported by PC 1.
>> >above) -
>> >> I have a 1mbps connection with my ISP.
>> >>
>> >> So this morning I bought another from a local shop thinking that the
>old
>> >> netgear one was past it. Putting the new one in put things back to
>where
>> >> they were - no connection or a truly slow one. Putting the long one
>back
>> >> and hey-presto back to normal again.
>> >>
>> >> During all the cabling shuffling, I could access the network so the
>> >> different cables only affected internet access.
>> >>
>> >> ADSL is a new area to me, but I would have thought that if the cable is
>> >good
>> >> enough for my 100mbps network, then it should be ok for ADSL - is this
>not
>> >> true?
>> >>
>> >> The NIC in 2. is a netgear FA311 fast ethernet adapter PCI card. It is
>> >> correctly reporting a 100 mbps connection.
>> >>
>> >> The only thing I can think of is the connectors at the end of the
>cables
>> >> which do not work are perhaps loose when inserted in the NIC whereas
>with
>> >> the longer cable the connector might be making a "better fit" - it
>seems
>> >the
>> >> same when you wiggle it about though.
>> >>
>> >> This has me beat - I am reluctant to go back to the shop just yet for
>yet
>> >> another cable until I've exhausted all other areas, including a faulty
>> >NIC?
>> >>
>> >> Has anyone had experience on this sort of thing?
>> >>
>> >> The long cable is approx 15 meters long and works faultlessly, whereas
>the
>> >> two shorter ones are 5 meters long and are "playing up" - what gives?
>> >>
>> >> TIA
>> >>
>> >> Paul
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>