WIn98se ICS odd timing/connect loss issues cropping up, still there after reinstall... advice ?

Hullo all,

Have had win98se with ICS working fine for a couple of years at least but
since a reinstall/re-enable of ICS it has been acting a bit weird...

a. DHCP wont work anymore for the client computer
ie Client is not able to get an address from the Hosts DHCP, so I
have fixed it at 192.168.0.2 with mask 255.255.255.0
b. The client cycles each 10mins or so of internet connectivity
ie. After a boot up, the client is ok for about 10 mins then for
another 10mins or so cant do any net access then it comes back again
for a few mins then off again. A ping -t of my ISP's DNS shows
slow access of from 200 - 1000ms or more then timeouts then access is
back again, doesnt correlate with website or emails etc This is now the
continuous mode and is very frustrating !
c. The host PC is also having cycling issues but not nearly as bad as above.
Each 20mins or so it doesnt do any bit torrent uploads for about a min
then its ok again and although not as regular as the client the host has
a rough cycle of 15 to 20min uploads then 30 sec to 1min of stall.
Other net acess at the time seems ok on the host.
d. Cant ping the modem from the client, ie 10.1.1.1 comes with timeout always
but can ping 192.168.0.1 and 10.1.1.2 always but not always able to ping
the ISP DNS or other net addresses due to the cycling described in b.
e. Can always ping the client ok from the host
f. Have the port forward done ok in ICS so uTorrent is ok etc


Here are the IP addresses:-

10.1.1.1 dsl-502t on host with latest firmware
10.1.1.2 Host pc
192.168.0.1 Host PC lan card rtl8029as (coax 10baset)
192.168.0.2 Client PC on 10baset lan card rtl8029as

Have done the usual re-install and my route table on the host is:-
(not that I fully understand it, hence my paste here for advice?)


Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.2 1
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.2 1
10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.1.1.2 10.1.1.2 1
10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.1.1.2 10.1.1.2 1
10.1.1.2 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1
10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 10.1.1.2 10.1.1.2 1
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1
192.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1
192.168.0.1 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1
192.168.0.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1
224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1
224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 10.1.1.2 10.1.1.2 1
224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 10.1.1.2 10.1.1.2 1
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.1 1



What can I do to make this work properly as the cards seem fine when driven
from their test programs and file transfers are ok at 1333Kbits/sec between
host and clients etc

And its odd I cannot ping 10.1.1.1 from the client at all ? <sigh>

--
Regards
Mike
* GMC/GMH VK/VL FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication
and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option.
* Australian VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress.
* Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au

On 09 Mar 2007 04:53:24 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) (Mike) wrote:

>Hullo all,
>
>Have had win98se with ICS working fine for a couple of years at least but
>since a reinstall/re-enable of ICS it has been acting a bit weird...

<snip>

>Here are the IP addresses:-
>
>10.1.1.1 dsl-502t on host with latest firmware


The dsl-502t is a router with its own nat sharing capability so you
should *NOT* be using ICS on win98se. This would cause all sorts of
problems not least of which is conflicting dhcp servers.

Disable ICS, reset the computers to use dhcp to get their addresses
and if everything isn't back to normal then post in detail how all
your kit is connected together and someone will be able to tell you
where you're going wrong.


Jim.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed) says...

>The dsl-502t is a router with its own nat sharing capability so you
>should *NOT* be using ICS on win98se. This would cause all sorts of
>problems not least of which is conflicting dhcp servers.

my dsl-502t has one usb and one utp connection and I am only using
the utp to connect to my host pc. dhcp is disabled in the 502
and the PC's ip of 10.1.1.2 is set manually.

>Disable ICS, reset the computers to use dhcp to get their addresses
>and if everything isn't back to normal then post in detail how all
>your kit is connected together and someone will be able to tell you
>where you're going wrong.

If I disable ICS then the client pc has no access at all.

Config is this:-
adsl into 502t with utp to the host motherboard lan connection
host also has an rtl8029 card with coax cabled to the client with
the same type of card.

As I mentioned, its been working fine for 2+ years, only recently
have odd slowdowns occured even after reinstall



--
Regards
Mike
* VK/VL Commodore FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication
and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option.
* VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress.
* Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au

On 09 Mar 2007 06:20:06 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) (Mike) wrote:

>If I disable ICS then the client pc has no access at all.
>
>Config is this:-
>adsl into 502t with utp to the host motherboard lan connection
>host also has an rtl8029 card with coax cabled to the client with
>the same type of card.

Okay.

If you can afford it then the best solution would be to get a switch
and plug all three devices into it.

There is a solution using your existing kit but it requires a bit more
configuration. You need the host to be a router but not a nat (ics)
router.

So first of all, disable ICS.

Then, enable routing in the registry as follows

System Key:
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Servic es\VxD\MSTCP]
Value Name: EnableRouting
Data Type: (string value)
Value Data: (0 = disabled, 1 = enabled)

Then using the ip addresses from your first post.

Router
10.1.1.1
add static route to send traffic for network 192.168.0.0 via 10.1.1.2

HostPC
10.1.1.2 connected to the router
192.168.0.1 connected to the client
default gateway 10.1.1.1
enable dns - nameservers as notified by your isp or 10.1.1.1

ClientPC
192.168.0.2
default gateway 192.168.0.1
enable dns - nameservers as notified by your isp or 10.1.1.1


Jim.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed) says...
>
>If you can afford it then the best solution would be to get a switch
>and plug all three devices into it.

mmmm, if I can just get back to what I had before then I would be happy,
even though my coax lan is only 10Meg, it worked perfectly for years
with the current hardware, and I was easily able to add runs to the coax
for 3 other PCs when my kids friends came over for a small lan game party,
thats what I liked about the coax - it just need me to add a piece of
coax and move the terminator - much easier than adding a hub and I didnt
mind it being half-duplex the games they play dont put much b/w need.

So I am guessing some config snafuuu has occured which doesnt get cleared
when doing a reinstall, maybe it writes to the eeprom on the network card
as well as some correlated setting in the modem making it cyclically kludge
from time to time...

>There is a solution using your existing kit but it requires a bit more
>configuration. You need the host to be a router but not a nat (ics)
>router.
>
>So first of all, disable ICS.

Ok I will give this a go, though I've never had to do any of the
registry changes before when setting up ICS some 10 times or so for
my systems over last 6 years for family and friends... Am I guessing
correctly I need to re-enable ICS after the procedure below ?

Please see my other queries below,


>Then, enable routing in the registry as follows
>
>System Key:
>[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Servic es\VxD\MSTCP]
>Value Name: EnableRouting
>Data Type: (string value)
>Value Data: (0 = disabled, 1 = enabled)
>
>Then using the ip addresses from your first post.
>
>Router
>10.1.1.1
>add static route to send traffic for network 192.168.0.0 via 10.1.1.2

Does this mean I need to use the DOS route command, there are so many
entries in that already I am not sure precisely of the format of the
route print in terms of what it displays for example and what syntax I
need to issue to make it add the static route you mention etc


>
>HostPC
>10.1.1.2 connected to the router
>192.168.0.1 connected to the client
>default gateway 10.1.1.1
>enable dns - nameservers as notified by your isp or 10.1.1.1

Ok, this seems like what I already have but will check it thoroughly,


>ClientPC
>192.168.0.2
>default gateway 192.168.0.1
>enable dns - nameservers as notified by your isp or 10.1.1.1

Given I couldnt even ping 10.1.1.1 before (or rather after the ICS
was re-enabled) then assuming the host changes and "adding a static
route" as you advise above then I should be able to ping 10.1.1.1 thereafter,
which suggests my registry got gurgled...

> Jim.

Thanks Jim,
I had wondered why Win98se needed icsmgr to run, as if its just a routing
issue and if it doesnt need to be re-enabled then would the routing just
do it - of course if it does then I guess that makes more sense but begs
the question why it worked fine for 2+ years without registry changes ?


--
Regards
Mike
* VK/VL Commodore FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication
and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option.
* VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress.
* Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au

On 09 Mar 2007 11:27:44 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) (Mike) wrote:

>>
>>So first of all, disable ICS.
>
>Ok I will give this a go, though I've never had to do any of the
>registry changes before when setting up ICS some 10 times or so for
>my systems over last 6 years for family and friends... Am I guessing
>correctly I need to re-enable ICS after the procedure below ?

No. This procedure doesn't use ICS. Editing the registry as described
enables routing without enabling ICS. Your router will be doing the
address translation (sharing) far more efficiently than ICS.

>
>Please see my other queries below,
>
>
>>Then, enable routing in the registry as follows
>>
>>System Key:
>>[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Servic es\VxD\MSTCP]
>>Value Name: EnableRouting
>>Data Type: (string value)
>>Value Data: (0 = disabled, 1 = enabled)
>>
>>Then using the ip addresses from your first post.
>>
>>Router
>>10.1.1.1
>>add static route to send traffic for network 192.168.0.0 via 10.1.1.2
>
>Does this mean I need to use the DOS route command, there are so many
>entries in that already I am not sure precisely of the format of the
>route print in terms of what it displays for example and what syntax I
>need to issue to make it add the static route you mention etc
>

No. Your router will probably have a web interface for its
configuration. Look in the manual for setting up static routes via the
web interface. If you don't have the manual there is a pdf on the
d-link website.

>
>>
>>HostPC
>>10.1.1.2 connected to the router
>>192.168.0.1 connected to the client
>>default gateway 10.1.1.1
>>enable dns - nameservers as notified by your isp or 10.1.1.1
>
>Ok, this seems like what I already have but will check it thoroughly,
>
>
>>ClientPC
>>192.168.0.2
>>default gateway 192.168.0.1
>>enable dns - nameservers as notified by your isp or 10.1.1.1
>
>Given I couldnt even ping 10.1.1.1 before (or rather after the ICS
>was re-enabled) then assuming the host changes and "adding a static
>route" as you advise above then I should be able to ping 10.1.1.1 thereafter,
>which suggests my registry got gurgled...
>

Until you configure the router to forward replies via the "host" pc
then it cannot reply because it does not know where to send the
packets for the client pc.

(sidenote: if you were using ICS this wouldn't be necessary because as
far as the router is concerned everything is coming from the host pc)

>> Jim.
>
>Thanks Jim,
>I had wondered why Win98se needed icsmgr to run, as if its just a routing
>issue and if it doesnt need to be re-enabled then would the routing just
>do it - of course if it does then I guess that makes more sense but begs
>the question why it worked fine for 2+ years without registry changes ?


You could do it using ics, but since the router is already doing the
address translation you would be building in a needless bottleneck
(doing the same translation operation twice).

Check the ping times when it's done. If the boys do Internet gaming
they will certainly notice a *BIG* difference.


Jim.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed) says...

>No. This procedure doesn't use ICS. Editing the registry as described
>enables routing without enabling ICS. Your router will be doing the
>address translation (sharing) far more efficiently than ICS.

Of course, I'd forgotten about that, just because my box doesnt have
multiple UTP ports I'd forgotten it can translate the addresses,
ie. Being such a little box I'd forgotten it can do rather more...

So it just means the host pc will pass the relevant packets by editing/enabling
the registry key - I didnt know that Win98se was capable of that level
of packet switching and had always assumed the ICSMGR (ie as an ICS install)
was needed for that function, I'm glad its not so it might run a bit quicker
overall as well

Strangely, when I first asked Dlink about the modem their tech dept suggested
I keep using ICS, hence for 2+ years thats all I thought was required, I
could have saved a heap of time if dlink had explained it the way you
have... <sigh>

>>>System Key:
>>>[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Servic es\VxD\MSTCP]
>>>Value Name: EnableRouting
>>>Data Type: (string value)
>>>Value Data: (0 = disabled, 1 = enabled)

Ok, I understand that the OS can pass the packets but I'm not sure
how the OS knows to pass them to the RTL8029 card and not some host
resident process ?

>No. Your router will probably have a web interface for its
>configuration. Look in the manual for setting up static routes via the
>web interface. If you don't have the manual there is a pdf on the
>d-link website.

ok np, have used the modem web interface many times but it hadnt twigged
I could over-ride/replace the windows ICS, as per Dlinks comment... I'll
go through the details later tonight,


>>Given I couldnt even ping 10.1.1.1 before (or rather after the ICS
>>was re-enabled) then assuming the host changes and "adding a static
>>route" as you advise above then I should be able to ping 10.1.1.1 thereafter,
>>which suggests my registry got gurgled...
>>
>
>Until you configure the router to forward replies via the "host" pc
>then it cannot reply because it does not know where to send the
>packets for the client pc.

Thats the part I'm a little hazy on, the router gets a data packet either
from any host resident process or from the client via the RTL8029 card
but the host needs to know where to put the reply that comes from the modem
(after it gets its reply from the net). This is where I thought the mass
of code in ICS and the .dlls was required. I infer you are saying that
with the routing enabled in windows os via an enabled registry key and the static
route in the modem that windows will "follow suit" and pass the replies
back to either the host process or the client via the rtl8029 card - its
that last bit that I'm not clear on in respect of that capacity already
built into the OS - not much confirmation of that since day one sadly.

>(sidenote: if you were using ICS this wouldn't be necessary because as
>far as the router is concerned everything is coming from the host pc)

Ok, its slowly beginning to gel that the router maps its replies from
the source requests it got from a host process or a client packet and
that the capacity to route is already within the OS and hence that must
mean that ICSMGR didnt really do that much in the first place except
maybe 'some' NAT and buffering - hence why its generally slow from day one.


>You could do it using ics, but since the router is already doing the
>address translation you would be building in a needless bottleneck
>(doing the same translation operation twice).

Yes, excellent point. I did have a try with an NB1300 some 4 years ago
to do some of this - rather to get it to work but IP routing isnt my
area of expertise (its electronic design) and although the NB1300 was
supposed to have NAT - my system/it could well have suffered from a
heap of combinatorial issues not allowing it to function, hence I used
ICS with the nb1300 too long before I got the Dlink 502t...

>Check the ping times when it's done. If the boys do Internet gaming
>they will certainly notice a *BIG* difference.

Excellent, should make my other browsing faster too, thanks for your
help, will give it a go later tonight when my lab stuff is over, cheers


--
Regards
Mike
* VK/VL Commodore FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication
and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option.
* VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress.
* Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au

On 09 Mar 2007 14:44:05 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) (Mike) wrote:

>
>Ok, I understand that the OS can pass the packets but I'm not sure
>how the OS knows to pass them to the RTL8029 card and not some host
>resident process ?
>

Every packet will have a source and destination address so the host
can easily determine which packets are for it and which are to be sent
on using the rules in the routing table.

<snip>

>>
>>Until you configure the router to forward replies via the "host" pc
>>then it cannot reply because it does not know where to send the
>>packets for the client pc.
>
>Thats the part I'm a little hazy on, the router gets a data packet either
>from any host resident process or from the client via the RTL8029 card
>but the host needs to know where to put the reply that comes from the modem
>(after it gets its reply from the net).


The nat router will replace the destination address in return packets
with the corresponding source addess it stripped on outgoing packets
so the hostpc will simply look at the destination address of packets
forwarded to it and either use them locally or forward them on again.


Jim

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed) says...

>Every packet will have a source and destination address so the host
>can easily determine which packets are for it and which are to be sent
>on using the rules in the routing table.

Brilliant, of course, forgot about that, understood and cemented now

>The nat router will replace the destination address in return packets
>with the corresponding source addess it stripped on outgoing packets
>so the hostpc will simply look at the destination address of packets
>forwarded to it and either use them locally or forward them on again.

Fantastic, got it
..
..
..

Ok <cough> have done all the changes you outlined, checked them, saved
the modem changes, rebooted, power cycled etc etc. And Voila *yes* I can
get internet access on the client pc 'some' of the time along with the
host subject to the timing oddities coming back !
(I actually uninstalled ICS and not just disabled it - was that an error ?)
But the registry key was already set to enable btw and it still is...

Client off, power up only the host and modem - it struggles to get
internet connectivity unless I visit the modem's web interface and go to
the Status display, here is a scenario I just tested:-

Restart host and modem.
None of the loaded tasks need internet access and the
modem is set to "always on"
Open a dos box and type ping -t 203.0.178.191 (and leave it running)
I get "Request timed out" all the time for the 6-7 min I could wait
Then visit the modem web page 10.1.1.1 and went to the status display
Within about 30 to 60 secs I got ping replies of about 20ms on average and
this continued until I closed the IE window and then within about 2 min I get
ping timeouts again.

Puzzled I checked that I have "Logon and restore network connections" (yes)
went back to modem web interface and then to tools and their ping function
and although the host got timeouts the modem's ping tool never did !

So assuming my modem is ok and I believe the ping tool in it, then what can
I do to diagnose this ?

I did repeat the modem web access through IE and after about a minute
got the dos box to show ping replies, closed IE and this time the pings seem to
keep going ok with times of 20 - 21ms and whilst composing this reply they
have kept going.

On earlier occasions I noticed the client pings of the isp dns match those
of the host in terms of replies and timeouts...

Is there a win98se compatible tool that might pin this down or do I have
to start from scratch again ?

oh btw:
If I open uTorrent then within 20 sec I will get a block of 15 ping timeouts
again and then back to connectivity but with ping replies of 180-600mS and
some timeouts and these timeouts correlate with drop of u/l b/w in uTorrent
to zero...

Just sit and wait and *ah* ping replies again until uTorrent makes some
connections then ping replies start to reach 600mS, u/l b/w drops gradually
then more timeouts...

Seems like what was happening before with ICS, does it point to modem
firmware and what tool could definitively pin this down ?


PS:
The modem has an entry for Lan clients and only have the host as the one
lan client as its the only other thing on that UTP connection, I didnt
add the other pc as the modem wont accept its IP (outside 10.1.1.2 - 10.1.1.254)
and the route to it is through the os etc...
The route table entry in the modem seems fine though as the client does
get reliable connections for each request - well within the bounds of
this issue of loss and recovery of internet connectivity

now im depressed.


--
Regards
Mike
* VK/VL Commodore FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure indication
and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option.
* VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress.
* Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au

"Mike" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:45f19b5e$0$1759$(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed) says...
>
>>Every packet will have a source and destination address so the host
>>can easily determine which packets are for it and which are to be sent
>>on using the rules in the routing table.
>
> Brilliant, of course, forgot about that, understood and cemented now
>
>>The nat router will replace the destination address in return packets
>>with the corresponding source addess it stripped on outgoing packets
>>so the hostpc will simply look at the destination address of packets
>>forwarded to it and either use them locally or forward them on again.
>
> Fantastic, got it
> .
> .
> .
>
> Ok <cough> have done all the changes you outlined, checked them, saved
> the modem changes, rebooted, power cycled etc etc. And Voila *yes* I can
> get internet access on the client pc 'some' of the time along with the
> host subject to the timing oddities coming back !
> (I actually uninstalled ICS and not just disabled it - was that an error
> ?)
> But the registry key was already set to enable btw and it still is...
>
> Client off, power up only the host and modem - it struggles to get
> internet connectivity unless I visit the modem's web interface and go to
> the Status display, here is a scenario I just tested:-
>
> Restart host and modem.
> None of the loaded tasks need internet access and the
> modem is set to "always on"
> Open a dos box and type ping -t 203.0.178.191 (and leave it running)
> I get "Request timed out" all the time for the 6-7 min I could wait
> Then visit the modem web page 10.1.1.1 and went to the status display
> Within about 30 to 60 secs I got ping replies of about 20ms on average and
> this continued until I closed the IE window and then within about 2 min I
> get
> ping timeouts again.
>
> Puzzled I checked that I have "Logon and restore network connections"
> (yes)
> went back to modem web interface and then to tools and their ping function
> and although the host got timeouts the modem's ping tool never did !
>
> So assuming my modem is ok and I believe the ping tool in it, then what
> can
> I do to diagnose this ?
>
> I did repeat the modem web access through IE and after about a minute
> got the dos box to show ping replies, closed IE and this time the pings
> seem to
> keep going ok with times of 20 - 21ms and whilst composing this reply they
> have kept going.
>
> On earlier occasions I noticed the client pings of the isp dns match those
> of the host in terms of replies and timeouts...
>
> Is there a win98se compatible tool that might pin this down or do I have
> to start from scratch again ?
>
> oh btw:
> If I open uTorrent then within 20 sec I will get a block of 15 ping
> timeouts
> again and then back to connectivity but with ping replies of 180-600mS and
> some timeouts and these timeouts correlate with drop of u/l b/w in
> uTorrent
> to zero...
>
> Just sit and wait and *ah* ping replies again until uTorrent makes some
> connections then ping replies start to reach 600mS, u/l b/w drops
> gradually
> then more timeouts...
>
> Seems like what was happening before with ICS, does it point to modem
> firmware and what tool could definitively pin this down ?
>
>
> PS:
> The modem has an entry for Lan clients and only have the host as the one
> lan client as its the only other thing on that UTP connection, I didnt
> add the other pc as the modem wont accept its IP (outside 10.1.1.2 -
> 10.1.1.254)
> and the route to it is through the os etc...
> The route table entry in the modem seems fine though as the client does
> get reliable connections for each request - well within the bounds of
> this issue of loss and recovery of internet connectivity
>
> now im depressed.
>
>
> --
> Regards
> Mike
> * VK/VL Commodore FuseRails that wont warp or melt with fuse failure
> indication
> and now with auto 10-15 min timer for engine illumination option.
> * VN, VP, VR Models with relay holder in progress.
> * Twin Tyres to suit most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
> http://niche.iinet.net.au
>

do happen to have MAC addressing enabled on the router ? (mine re-enables
after a reset )