DHCP, Yes...Ping, No? Please Help!

[GTaudiophile]

I'm trying to fix a co-workers laptop. It's a PIII-700 machine running Win98. I've got one network (LAN 10/100) adapter installed, DHCP enabled. By going to winipcfg, I can see that it's successfully pulling an IP from the router. I can ping localhost and I can ping the IP of the laptop. I cannot ping the router, nor any other machines on the network, much less get outside the network to the Internet.

Can anyone give me some tips on how I can narrow down the problem?

 

[HKSturboKID]

Try to reinstall the TCP/IP stack.

 

[SaturnX]

Is the router sucessfully pulling an IP from the ISP's DHCP?

--Mark

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: Tharyn
Is the router sucessfully pulling an IP from the ISP's DHCP?

--Mark

I am posting through the same router that the laptop is using. That's fine. I am looking at the DHCP list of the router now, and it shows the laptop and its MAC address.

How do I go about reinstalling the TCP/IP stuff? Through Windows Add/Remove software function?

 

[GTaudiophile]

I have uninstalled and reinstalled all the network-related hardware drivers and windows software components. I upgraded to Dial-Up Networking 1.4 for Win98SE. I can't think of anything else to do.

There is one last thing: Whenever I go to Explorer>Internet Options>Connections and add a LAN connection, "tapisvr" always crashes on me. I went to MS's knowledge base, and followed the directions for deleted and reextracting the files for this. Still, no go! Even after replacing the files, tapisvr still crashes.

 

[GTaudiophile]

No one knows how I can better determine where Windows is going wrong?

I will be updating NAV and running it to see if the issue is viral.

 

[gunrunnerjohn]

Have you tried the famous WINSOCK Fix? This sounds like it might be the problem.

 

[GTaudiophile]

I'll give it a try later. Thanks.

 

[oog]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I'm trying to fix a co-workers laptop. It's a PIII-700 machine running Win98. I've got one network (LAN 10/100) adapter installed, DHCP enabled. By going to winipcfg, I can see that it's successfully pulling an IP from the router. I can ping localhost and I can ping the IP of the laptop. I cannot ping the router, nor any other machines on the network, much less get outside the network to the Internet.

Can anyone give me some tips on how I can narrow down the problem?

When you say that it is pulling an IP from the router, are you sure that it is? I don't remember if Win98 does this, but other Windows OSs will generate their own IP address in the 169.* range if they don't get one from DHCP. Is the laptop's address in the same subnet as the router?

 

[GTaudiophile]

Yes, it's pulling one. I had it here at work yesterday and it pulled 192.168.0.120, then I took it home and it pulled 192.168.1.25...both of those addresses are in line with the respective router settings.

 

[klaatuboradonickto]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Yes, it's pulling one. I had it here at work yesterday and it pulled 192.168.0.120, then I took it home and it pulled 192.168.1.25...both of those addresses are in line with the respective router settings.

It appears that the router may not be handing you a correct subnet mask. You can have an IP address in the "same" subnet range, but unless the subnet mask is the same for the router and all the pc's, your not really in the "real" subnet.

For a 192 subnet, your mask should be 255.255.255.0, a class C address range. Make sure the router and your PC are both have teh same subnet mask.

Then also make sure that you are getting a default gateway address from the router, which should be the router's address.

With subnet masks the same, within the same IP range and all having the same default gateway, it should work.

Klaatu

One more thing to try if teh above doesn't work. If masks are good, the gateway is OK, then try to hard-code an address in the same IP address field, same mask and with the gateway defined, bypass DHCP.

 

[gunrunnerjohn]

I'm curious as to where the idea the subnet mask is incorrect comes from, since I haven't seen any posting of what he has. It would be pretty unusual for the DHCP server to assign a correct IP address and an incorrect subnet mask, expecially if the same DHCP server is handing out the working addresses...

 

[GTaudiophile]

It grabs the right IP, subnet mask, DNS servers, etc. Setting the IP manually has the same results.

I will work on it more tomorrow.

 

[SoulAssassin]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Yes, it's pulling one. I had it here at work yesterday and it pulled 192.168.0.120, then I took it home and it pulled 192.168.1.25...both of those addresses are in line with the respective router settings.

Can you confirm that you also weren't able to ping anything from home? It certainly seems the problem is w the laptop itself but this should prove it.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: SoulAssassin

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Yes, it's pulling one. I had it here at work yesterday and it pulled 192.168.0.120, then I took it home and it pulled 192.168.1.25...both of those addresses are in line with the respective router settings.

Can you confirm that you also weren't able to ping anything from home? It certainly seems the problem is w the laptop itself but this should prove it.

Both at work and at home: laptop pulls info from router successfully, can ping localhost, can ping assigned IP for the laptop, cannot ping router, nor other machines on the LAN, nor machines outside the LAN.

 

[klaatuboradonickto]

Originally posted by: gunrunnerjohn
I'm curious as to where the idea the subnet mask is incorrect comes from, since I haven't seen any posting of what he has. It would be pretty unusual for the DHCP server to assign a correct IP address and an incorrect subnet mask, expecially if the same DHCP server is handing out the working addresses...

Well Gunrunner:

12 manufacturing runs of Linksys cable routers and 3 runs of Netgear in the last 2 years have all produced firmware that did indeed send the wrong subnet masks out from the DHCP response. Even though a 192 subnet should have received a 255.255.255.0 mask, they were sending our a Class A mask. Having seen many problems with SOHO class "gateways", not even routers, I can assure you that this happens quite frequently. Netgear is quite quick to respond, but Linksys is not.

Even some of Cisco Series 800 "real" routers had a problem last year. Adtran Netvanta's also had a similiar problem early this year.

So unfortunately, it is not pretty unusual at all.

Also, using DHCP these days for home networks is not recommended, as P2P services do not work so well NAT'ed. Needs to use public LAN servers so that the "router" will re-direct the appropriate port # traffic to a specific machine. Using DHCP could mean a lot of "router" Policy Table changes to keep up.

For small networks, do not use DHCP. Causes more problems than it is worth.

Klaatu

 

[Kadarin]

None of the previous discussion really addresses the problem in an intelligent manner. The ethernet adapter is able to obtain what appear to be correct dhcp leases from different dhcp servers, which means that traffic is able to travel in both directions over that interface. My thought would be to verify in Network Neighborhood properties that there are no other adapters bound to the tcp/ip protocol. Provided you have all the drivers onhand along with the Win98 CD, you could remove the network adapter and the tcp/ip protocol stack (from that same Properties window), and then reinstall first tcp/ip and then the adapter. If you never use dialup on that machine, you might try removing the ppp adapter. If there's any kind of AOL adapter installed, remove it. (Note: Not talking about physical adapters here, but logical ones that Windows recognizes as network devices.)

 

[GTaudiophile]

Astaroth33: I already did that. I did two things: 1) went to Device Manager and deleted/removed all drivers for listed network adapters, and 2) went into the network properties list and removed ALL connections/devices in the list. Rebooted and installed only the drivers for the 10/100 LAN PCMCIA adapter. It grabbed the IP from the router and once again I could only ping localhost (127.0.0.1) and the IP given to the laptop. I could not ping the router, LAN machines, nor WAN machines (www.google.com).

The only anamoly I can see is that when I go to Internet Options in Explorer>Connections,>Add New Connection>select LAN, the wizard crashes on me. More specifically, tapisvr crashes on me. I went to MS's knowledge base and followed their instructions for removing tapisrv and its associated files, then running SFC to reinstall its components from the Win98 CD-ROM. Of course, it started crashing again.

 

[ScottMac]

Most of the time, problems like this turn out to be software firewall related.

Please check your services carefully to make sure some fragment of firewall is not running. It has happened in the past that a person believes they have completely un-installed the software firewall, or replaced one with another ... but one little piece of the filter code hangs in there and causes trouble.

From what I've read in the previous posts, connectivity is verified, addressing and mask has been verified ... it's got to be a little extra something in the stack that's gundecking your traffic.

IMHO< uninstall any and all firewall code, then go to the services and make sure that some service (like "TrueVector" for ZoneAlarm) isn't still active.

I have also seen on my laptop where I have assigned the same address to two adapters (only one active at a time) it doesn't always work well. Looking at the NIC status shows traffic being sent, but not received. Removing the duplicate address (and a reboot) usually resolves it.

Something else you can look at is the ARP table ("ARP -a" from the command prompt). You should see an IP to MAC mapping for (at least) the router.

Good Luck

Scott

 

[GTaudiophile]

How do I look at services in Win98?

 

[gunrunnerjohn]

Originally posted by: klaatuboradonickto
Well Gunrunner: 12 manufacturing runs of Linksys cable routers and 3 runs of Netgear in the last 2 years have all produced firmware that did indeed send the wrong subnet masks out from the DHCP response. Even though a 192 subnet should have received a 255.255.255.0 mask, they were sending our a Class A mask. Having seen many problems with SOHO class "gateways", not even routers, I can assure you that this happens quite frequently. Netgear is quite quick to respond, but Linksys is not. Even some of Cisco Series 800 "real" routers had a problem last year. Adtran Netvanta's also had a similiar problem early this year. So unfortunately, it is not pretty unusual at all. Also, using DHCP these days for home networks is not recommended, as P2P services do not work so well NAT'ed. Needs to use public LAN servers so that the "router" will re-direct the appropriate port # traffic to a specific machine. Using DHCP could mean a lot of "router" Policy Table changes to keep up. For small networks, do not use DHCP. Causes more problems than it is worth. Klaatu

First off, you seem to suffer from selective reading comprehension. Even though there have been instances of bad firmware, 99.99% of the broadband routers ever shipped issue the correct subnet masks, so this isn't like it's top of the list for things to check.

Add to that the subnet mask wasn't specified in any of the messages, it's certainly not the first thing to check. Oh, and the fact he's able to ping other devices in the network would certainly lead me to believe the subnet mask is correct, another point to consider.

As far as not using DHCP for home networks, that's a total crock IMO! Most home user barely can plug the cables in, and you're asking them to manually configure the TCP/IP properties. FWIW, DHCP and NAT are totally different animals, and even though you disable the DHCP server in your router, I can assure you that the NAT layer is alive and well. Without NAT, you'd cease to have a router, think about it. The majority of people with broadband routers never even get to the point of having to open ports for any service, never mind P2P.

In point of fact, I STRONGLY recommend people use DHCP unless there's a specific reason not to use it. It simplifies network installation to the point of almost plug-n-play. I've installed networks from two machines to several hundred, and I've yet to run across a reason not to use DHCP in any of them. FYI, most modern SOHO routers will allow you to lock a MAC address to the IP address, in case you insist on using P2P software to infect your machine.

 

[SoulAssassin]

Originally posted by: gunrunnerjohn
Oh, and the fact he's able to ping other devices in the network would certainly lead me to believe the subnet mask is correct, another point to consider.

Actually he said he's only able to ping localhost, but other than that, I fully agree.

I think the problem revolves around the tapisvr issue. It shouldn't be used for a LAN connection but if there was a previously used DUN connection it may still be in use. Based on the fact that you can't run the wizard to switch it to use the LAN connection (a necessary step for success) and that uninstalling/reinstalling tapisvr blows up on you I'm thinking your only options are some hardcore registry hacking or rebuilding the laptop (and I -really- had recommending that). Swapping the NIC w a known good one might be a worthwhile step to take before rebuilding the machine but I don't have any reason to believe it's bad.

 

[GTaudiophile]

I've swapped the 10/100 LAN NIC with a D-Link Wireless NIC. Once again, the card can see the wireless network (ID), ping localhost, and but not LAN or WAN machines.

 

[treetop]

have you tried to ping to the machine from another machine? pinging the localhost doesn't mean anything, as it is just a loopback call. one more thing, in win9x you cannot have more than 5 adapters installed i believe, so check if you have more than that and delete unnecessary ones. hope this helps.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Nope, I can't ping it from other machines. It has two adapters installed: LAN and PPP.

I just finished backing it up. I'm putting a new OS on it.