NIC connection problems to Netgear WGT624 w/cable

[ibrewale]

My configuration I am trying to set up is using a '2wire' dsl modem/router (DSW1000), with a cat-5 cable going from it to a newly aquired Netgear WGT624 4 port hub/wireless, and connecting my linux box in one of the ports (along with PS2 etc).

I can connect my linux box fine straigt into the '2wire' dsl modem/router on eth1.
This is the following reported on ifconfig

eth1      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:05:5D:46:83:85
          inet addr:172.16.1.37  Bcast:172.16.255.255  Mask:255.255.0.0
          inet6 addr: fe80::205:5dff:fe46:8385/64 Scope:Link
          UP BROADCAST MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          RX packets:1637 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:1329 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
          RX bytes:1227650 (1.1 MiB)  TX bytes:200960 (196.2 KiB)
          Interrupt:5 Base address:0x8700

lo        Link encap:Local Loopback
          inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
          UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:16436  Metric:1
          RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
          RX bytes:0 (0.0 b)  TX bytes:0 (0.0 b)

I have turned off DHCP on the Netgear, and can still wirelessly connect a laptop running XP to it.

When I try to run that cat5 cable to the Netgear and plug my linux box into a port (any of the ports), I have no luck getting eth1 up and running.

I have tried numerous times to use the "network card configuration" utilizing various addresses such as:
IP addrss 172.16.1.37
Broadcast 172.16.255.255
mask 255.255.0.0

with NO luck.
I have pump -i eth1 on many attempts, and I have tried different addresses in the configuration. The pump comes back as failing.

I am using AT&T (old SBCglobal) as the DSL provider.

What do I need to do to get my eth1 NIC card when connected to the Netgear hub/router to get a good connection and access to the internet.

I am willing to check various settings if someone will need more information to help me figure this out.

Thanks
Jerry

[Harry Kuhman]

From the ifconfig you posted it certainly looks like the NIC is up and running.

What is the NIC (make. model, version, chipset)? Why did you disable DHCP in the router? What happens if you try enabling DHCP?

The only thing that looks out of place (to me) in the info that you posted is the broadcast address and network mask. The broadcast address is correct for that mask, but many small home routers like this will support tables no larger than network with a 255.255.255.0 mask. I'm wondering if that is in some strange way related to your problem. You might try a mask 255.255.255.0 and a broadcast address xxx.xxx.1.255. I'm also wondering why you are using the 172.16.xxx.xxx range rather than the more common 192.168.xxx.xxx range; is there any particular reason for this that we should know about? What is assigned if you turn DHCP on?

[ibrewale]

I'm sorry I wasn't too clear.
The ifconfig I quoted there was while my linux box was connected directly to the 2wire dsl modem/wireless router, and working.
That is why I would guess it uses 172.... instead of the 192.168..addresses.

Now, my Netgear wireless hub does have a default address of 192.168.0.1 per the sticker on the bottom of it.
BUT, right now it shows up as 172.16.1.37 in my 2wire configuration page...?

I originally left dhcp on, on the Netgear, but had read various places that one thing to due to make something like this work is to disable dhcp in the Netgear and leave it on in the 2wire dsl modem. (to prevent inteference??)

When I connect my linux box to the Netgear (while the netgear is connected to the 2wire dslmodem) my ifconfig does not have eth1 in it, just lo.
Then I try to "pump -i eth1" and it fails. I have then tried using the network card configuration utility under the knoppix icon on the task bar "knoppix/network-internet/network card configuration" which just asks me to use dhcp or not, when I choose not to, it then has me put in the address values for eth1 (broadcast, gateway, etc). This is where Im at a loss at. Am I just putting in the wrong addresses and values? Or is there another thing I have to configure?
I have tried 192.168.1.105 for ip address, 192.168.1.255 for broadcast, 192.168.0.1 for gateway and nameserver, among other attempts with different addresses with no luck.

As far as the NIC make, model, version, and chipset..what is the easiest way to find out? It is at least 8 years old - same as this old box- and works directly with the 2wire.
How do I find out the make model and chipset without opening up the box? Or is that the way?

Thanks for the help so far Harry.

Jerry

[Harry Kuhman]

Well, the 172.16.xxx.xxx address range is a private address range, much like the 192.168.xxx.xxx range. See RFC 1918 for details. If you show 172.16.xxx.xxx when comnnected to your dsl modem then the modem must have a built in router. In that case disabling dhcp isn't really the issue, you really want to use a switch rather than a router (to avoid a double NAT situation). And if you think that running double NAT is acceptable (I don't but I know some people do), then there is really no reason to disable DHCP. Which is to say that turning DHCP off is not the same thing as using a switch; turning off DHCP still leaves the router as a router, it doesn't turn it into a switch. There might be some other setting in you router that might help, but without going through the router's manual I can't say for sure. look for some feature that may disable the router portion and still leave the switch and access point functional (a few routers have this type of feature but in my experience most don't).

[Harry Kuhman]

As far as the NIC make, model, version, and chipset..what is the easiest way to find out? It is at least 8 years old - same as this old box- and works directly with the 2wire.
How do I find out the make model and chipset without opening up the box? Or is that the way?

I doubt that it is a NIC issue based on the new info, so this isn't worth following up on. We now know that Knoppix supports your NIC fine. But you could easily get most of this info from the control pannel in Windows.

[ibrewale]

Thanks Harry

I haven't had windows on this box in a couple of years, just linux only (knoppix/debian) thankfully.

From what I gather then, unless I can turn off the 'router' portion of the netgear WGT624 specifically, I'm stuck and should look really to buy a switch?

If so, any specific switch better than others, or is it just the cheaper the better?

If I stick a switch in, any issues getting it up and running in linux?

Obviously, I'm new to the networking side of linux, so sorry if these questions seem pretty goofy, I'll start googling them now.

Thanks Harry

Jerry

[ibrewale]

Another piece of information:

According to the netgear website, it states that if using the netgear with a internet service providers modem that has NAT, then I should turn the ISP modem into 'Bridge" mode.

I have tried this, earlier today, and once I did that, I no longer could connect to the internet with the 2wire. I did end up calling tech support and they walked me thru turning it back on from my window laptop wired up to the isp supplied 2wire dsl/modem.

Is this the route I should be looking, making the 2wire a 'bridge'?

* Your ISP provided you a modem with NAT (Network Address Translation). If you have NAT set on your modem, please call your ISP and have them set your modem to “Bridge� mode.

http://kbserver.netgear.com/kb_web_files/n101209.asp

[Harry Kuhman]

From what I gather then, unless I can turn off the 'router' portion of the netgear WGT624 specifically, I'm stuck and should look really to buy a switch?

There are issues running double NAT. It can make it hard for some systems that automatically bypass a NAT firewall to work (Skype, Hamachi, Gtalk for example) and may conflict with some on-line games. You local network likely will not work properly between things on the second router and computers on the first (in you case it sounds like everything is connected to the second). As I said, some people live with double NAT and it should work OK for simple web browsing, but I avoid it myself. I don't want to discourage you from tryiong to get what you have working, just want to let you know there are some issues.

If so, any specific switch better than others, or is it just the cheaper the better?

Pretty much any small inexpensive unmanaged switch intended for home use should do it. A simple 10/100 5 port switch can sometimes be found for around $10. Switches with more ports tend to be more expensive, do about the same except provide more ports. A hub will also do the job but hubs are older technology and should be avoided unless you have specific use for one (like packet sniffing) or you can get an old one free.

If I stick a switch in, any issues getting it up and running in linux?

A simple unmanaged switch (you don't want to be buying an expensive managed switch for industrial use) just expands the number of ethernet ports available. While it has some smarts to it (it automatically builds it's own routing table and knows which devices are on which ports), it does not have it's own IP address and is basically transparent to the network. So if you plug a switch between the DSL modem (with internal router) and the computer, that computer will get it's DHCP setup from the modem/router and should get an IP address in the range that the modem/router is handing out. Other devices plugged into the switch will also do DHCP with the modem/router and get their owm IP addresses. So your network with a switch should work just as it did if you plugged the computer into the modem. This would also be the case if the wireless router had an option to run as a switch.

Of course, there is still the issue of the wireless side of the new router. If you want to connect wirelessly you'll need to use that router, or get an "access point". If you plan on using the wireless router then I expect that you would be better off with all computers behind the second router (double NAT) than some computers on a switch and one or two on a wireless connection and only them behind double NAT)