Broadband problem VIP 722

I think the 192.168.XXX.XXX is an internal router IP, not an IP from your ISP.

AFAIK all internal routers use the 192.168 or similar internal IP's, mine do.

Basically the router is 192.168.2.1 and it assigns IP's to connected devices in the order that they connect, thus you get the ...2.2, ...2.3, and ...2.4.

If your ISP was assigning the IP's they would not be in this range and probably not be consecutive.
 
On the external side of my dsl modem, I have a 184.x.x.x ip address that is my true Internet connection.

Actually my dsl modem does give out a class C range starting with 192.168.2.1 for the dsl box itself (on the internal side). Then anything plugged 'directly' into the dsl modem gets a 192.168.2.xxx in consecutive order. This allows for NAT, PAT, IP masquerading, etc.

My linux server gives out 192.168.3.xxx addresses for my internal network.

So, my laptop routes from the 192.168.3.x to the 192.168.2.x to the 184.x.x.x to get to the internet.
My Dish 722k boxes go from the 192.168.2.x to the 184.x.x.x

The 192.168.3.x network was blocking UPnp and probably some other ports from working correctly which is why I removed a hop from the 722ks.

Hopefully that clears things up a bit for those that weren't clear before.

I think the 192.168.XXX.XXX is an internal router IP, not an IP from your ISP.

AFAIK all internal routers use the 192.168 or similar internal IP's, mine do.

Basically the router is 192.168.2.1 and it assigns IP's to connected devices in the order that they connect, thus you get the ...2.2, ...2.3, and ...2.4.

If your ISP was assigning the IP's they would not be in this range and probably not be consecutive.
 
I just returned home after a 3 week RV trip and am just now catching up on the posts. Just before I left I posted that a simple network hub/switch with a timer that turns the network hub/switch off and on periodically was a possible solution. I am happy to report that it does in fact work very well or has for me.

What this also tells me is that the LAN chip in the 722 and 722K shuts down due to a lack of activity. Dish may have in fact used the wrong chip set. There is clearly an issue “conflict” between the hardware and the application levels in the Dish implementation. The timer/hub forces the 722’s LAN interface to wake up. This could be due to UPnP (simple plus and play). This is like when you plug in a new device in your PC and the PC detects and even installs the drivers if needed.

My home network is typical. I have AT&T DSL connecting to a Netopia router. The Netopia connects to a 16 port Linksys network switch. The Netopia also provides DHCP services and wireless. I have various PCs, printers and two 722s and one 722k that connect to the Linksys switch. Most of these devices use dynamic IP addresses obtained from the Netopia. As I mentioned, most of these devices also connect through the Linksys switch.

For well over a year, perhaps two years we never had a problem obtaining a remote connection to check and change our DVRs recording schedules. We did not watch programs remotely. I would sometimes use my Sing beta remote account to listen to music, but this was all. Some months ago I purchased a Sling adapter and upon installing it, had to create a new Dish Online account.

With the new sling adapter and the Dish Online account we started experiencing the issues discussed in this forum.

As I mentioned at the opening, I installed a small network switch on a Home Depot timer that turns this Linksys switch off for one minute every three hours. I did not connect my 16 port network switch to the timer as I did not want to impact my PCs and printers. Hence the small Linksys switch is connected between the 722s/722k and my larger switch.

My earlier post suggesting this idea is not without merit as I worked in the telecommunications world for many years. My basis for the idea is predicated on the OSI network design model. Read about it at OSI model - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Pay attention to the Physical Layer as this appears to be defect Dish implemented.

Re, Mike Angles
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts