<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Ooops forgot to include my reply to Alan on the list, forwarded for
the 'benefit' of everyone. You'll be pleased to know I've concluded
my experiments with routed home networks :-)<br>
<div class="moz-forward-container"><br>
<br>
-------- Forwarded Message --------
<table class="moz-email-headers-table" border="0" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">Subject:
</th>
<td>Re: Routed LANs vs WOL & Windows troubles</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">Date: </th>
<td>Tue, 14 Apr 2015 10:28:25 +0100</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">From: </th>
<td>Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:kevin@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk"><kevin@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">To: </th>
<td>Alan Jenkins <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:alan.christopher.jenkins@gmail.com"><alan.christopher.jenkins@gmail.com></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 13/04/2015 23:25, Alan Jenkins
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CANmMgnFWNUhM_6E4mSQAOzN14Y5bQzk1O206sacEMJTJtD0TXw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">O</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<snip><br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CANmMgnFWNUhM_6E4mSQAOzN14Y5bQzk1O206sacEMJTJtD0TXw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">Discovered that a couple of iphone
based apps for my Sky set top box,<br>
<div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> Yamaha AV Receiver
& TV won't do device discovery either.<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
Sounds about right :-).<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> <br>
Battling on,<br>
<br>
Kevin<br>
</blockquote>
<div> </div>
In case I'm being stupidly ambiguous: I hear pain
without a specific gain here.<br>
<br>
We haven't given you a number to say it makes your life
better. Also we know wifi needs a bunch more work.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
You're absolutely right which is why later today things are going
back to firmware defaults and I shall be retreating to
192.168.230/24 with the default bridging across LAN & WAN
ports.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CANmMgnFWNUhM_6E4mSQAOzN14Y5bQzk1O206sacEMJTJtD0TXw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
If you _can_ see a subjective difference from the
blocking of multicast in a home network, or something?
I think everyone would love to hear it.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
No, of course I can't. It was just theoretically the 'right thing
to do' and I suppose some idiot has to try it....I don't mind
being an idiot, comes naturally :-)<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CANmMgnFWNUhM_6E4mSQAOzN14Y5bQzk1O206sacEMJTJtD0TXw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks for the firewall explanation in particular,
personally I found that interesting.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Something useful has come out of this experience/experiment then
:-) I'm probably a little more aware of windows firewall
behaviour than the average home user after my experiences with
IPv6. Windows may acquire IPv6 addresses via DHCPv6 but since
this protocol doesn't propagate a 'netmask' it has to treat each
address as a /128. It then solicits/looks out for RA broadcasts
that tell it which IPv6 prefixes are 'on-link' (ie prefix
length/local subnet) There was an early bug in dnsmasq's RA
broadcasts which didn't have the relevant bit set (and I was
experimenting using dnsmasq for all my dns/dhcp4/6 needs and
ditching radvd) the net result was that I couldn't ping local IPv6
Windows boxes because they weren't considered 'on-link alias
local-subnet'. Windows limits a number of services to local
subnet only including file sharing.<br>
<br>
At present, without an obvious automatic mechanism for servers to
expand the 'local subnet' pool, Windows file sharing is going to
be very problematic in the home across subnets.
<blockquote
cite="mid:CANmMgnFWNUhM_6E4mSQAOzN14Y5bQzk1O206sacEMJTJtD0TXw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>
<div><br>
Ah. I meant server in the technical sense: the PC
providing the file service.<br>
<br>
</div>
So I believe there is no automatic solution for this
case in Windows.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>I'm sure sysadmins could script or gpo it, deploying
to managed pcs. But not the kind of scripts pcs will
run automatically on a given IP network :). Even if the
network is marked as trusted ("home" / "work" / "private
network").<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Also if anyone tries to use "Homegroup" - the wizard
stuff in win 7+ - AFAICT it specifically only works on a
single subnet.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Agreed.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CANmMgnFWNUhM_6E4mSQAOzN14Y5bQzk1O206sacEMJTJtD0TXw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> I've both Samba
& avahi running on the router, in theory configured
to<br>
do the required SMB/WINS name collecting/forwarding.
Similar with Avahi<br>
for mDNS stuff.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span class=""> </span>The
Samba WINS server is almost working, seems to be
advertising every<br>
other box...except the server. So close!<span class=""><br>
</span></blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Annoying!<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CANmMgnFWNUhM_6E4mSQAOzN14Y5bQzk1O206sacEMJTJtD0TXw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Obviously, like I mentioned about dnsmasq, if WHS
isn't configured through DHCP & you set it with a
purely static IP instead - it's not going to pick up
WINS from DHCP. It can be configured statically. <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/man/Samba-HOWTO-Collection/ClientConfig.html#id2575612">https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/man/Samba-HOWTO-Collection/ClientConfig.html#id2575612</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
I've a static mapping within dnsmasq, so all servers get
everything they need via DHCP4/6/RA but they do all stay at the
same address....I have to nail *something* down (well in IPv4 at
least. Don't get me started on IPv6 SLAAC/Privacy
addresses/DUID...and name resolution, oh yes and IPv6 firewall
'pin hole' solutions)<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CANmMgnFWNUhM_6E4mSQAOzN14Y5bQzk1O206sacEMJTJtD0TXw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>`ipconfig /all` will show name resolution config
somewhere, which includes the WINS server.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>If WHS 2011 denies the existence of your WINS, there
is a hack to create static entries in samba[1]. There
is also a deprecated config[2] to forward wins queries
to dns (I do not endorse this, but it means you could
use a dns entry).<br>
<br>
[1] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/man/Samba-HOWTO-Collection/NetworkBrowsing.html#id2584250">https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/man/Samba-HOWTO-Collection/NetworkBrowsing.html#id2584250</a><br>
[2] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/ch07.html#samba2-CHP-7-SECT-1.4.1">https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/ch07.html#samba2-CHP-7-SECT-1.4.1</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Thanks for that - it may yet come in handy.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CANmMgnFWNUhM_6E4mSQAOzN14Y5bQzk1O206sacEMJTJtD0TXw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span class=""> ><br>
>> 4) (A bonus Monty Python question) I've a
second wireless access point<br>
>> at the other end of the garden, attached by a
suitable length of Cat 6.<br>
>> Devices at mid travel point ideally roam from
House wifi to Shed<br>
>> wifi...but now they change IP address as
well. To be honest I'm not<br>
>> sure how this actually works in a bridged
environment either since the<br>
>> MAC now migrates from local wireless bridge
interface to local wired<br>
>> interface and potentially back again as I
wander around the garden...how<br>
>> does it really know where to send frames to
this magically roaming<br>
>> device?<br>
><br>
> Yes they can't keep the same IP address on a
different subnet :).<br>
> There are common cases where you don't notice and
it wouldn't matter.<br>
><br>
> There are references for bridging. Basically
it's an optimization<br>
> over flooding packets to every single port
(old-style dumb hub). As<br>
> soon as you send a frame from your MAC, all the
bridges/switches in<br>
> between "learn" where you are now. If the target
isn't known yet, the<br>
> frame is just flooded.<br>
><br>
> Maybe this helps: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://computer.howstuffworks.com/ethernet12.htm"
target="_blank">http://computer.howstuffworks.com/ethernet12.htm</a><br>
><br>
</span>Toke has given some instruction on this. After
some sleep I may even<br>
understand it :-)<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Toke's setup sounds like a commercial "wireless
controller". Each wifi AP is trunked back to the main
router, which bridges all the wifi together (but doesn't
bridge to wired access). Wifi is a single subnet
again. IPs don't change when roaming between APs
anymore.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I get what you're saying. The 'gain' is that 5Ghz(1 AP) &
2.5Ghz (2 AP) & Wired (2 'AP') are still different subnets. I
sort of got this working by messing with vlans (effectively
partitioning a LAN port out of the LAN group and placing in it in
a bridge with local 2.5Ghz & remote AP 2.5Ghz) Unfortunately
due to some Archer C7 strangeness with the vlan process it started
dropping packets, no matter which wireless or wired port, so I
gave up on that idea. There have been many hurdles on this
journey and I've pretty much smashed into every one. So in short,
I shall now stop trying to be so darn clever (ha!) and hit the
factory reset button :-) Single subnet, bridged WLANs/LANs here
I come.........phuuut!<br>
<br>
Kevin<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Thanks,
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Kevin@Darbyshire-Bryant.me.uk">Kevin@Darbyshire-Bryant.me.uk</a>
</pre>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>