| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mv
Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 6779
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2024 6:54 pm Post subject: Cannot connect to my new router [Solved] |
 |
|
Hi,
I received a new router Fritz!Box 5530 Fiber. Previously I had Fritz!Box 5490 Fiber.
Unfortunately, I cannot connect the new router at all, not even ping it. I have no idea what might be the difference to the old router.
Could it be related with the fact that I switched off ipv6 in the kernel completely? I am using openrc[netifrc] + dhcpcd.
The thing is: After a while I get an address like
| Code: | ifconfig
lan0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet 169.254.[redacted] netmask 255.255.0.0 broadcast 169.254.255.255
ether [redacted] txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet)
RX packets 0 bytes 0 (0.0 B)
RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0
TX packets 67 bytes 12988 (12.6 KiB)
TX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0
device interrupt 16 memory 0xa1100000-a1120000
lo: flags=73<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING> mtu 65536
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 255.0.0.0
loop txqueuelen 1000 (Local Loopback)
RX packets 24 bytes 2344 (2.2 KiB)
RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0
TX packets 24 bytes 2344 (2.2 KiB)
TX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0 |
which seems to be a complete nonsense: The router is in the 192.168.0.* net, so it is not surprising that I cannot reach it.
It is certainly a configuration problem on my side, because on a laptop with another distribution (using gnome/systemd/networkmanager or whatever), the laptop got the address in the correct net. (In fact I could change there the net on the router side from 192.168.178.* to 192.168.0.*).
I could use that laptop to explicitly configure that router to give to the [redacted] MAC the 192.168.0.80 IP, but on my gentoo pc I still seem to receive something in the 169.254.*.* net.
Edit: Solved. On my new router, the 2.5G port was disabled by the config settings by default. You have to connect through another port (or WLAN) and change the config before you can use that port. Unfortunately, this unexpected default was apprently not documented anywhere.
Last edited by mv on Sun Sep 08, 2024 4:39 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
pietinger
Moderator
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 4856
Location: Bavaria
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mv
Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 6779
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2024 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for your reply.
It seems the problem is at least partially solved, though it seems more and more strange:
I connected the cable now again to a “secondary” ethernet socket of the FritzBox (instead of the “primary” one), and this time I received the 192.168.0.90 address. Strange things:
- I had done this (connecting to a “secondary“ ethernet socket) already before I had used the laptop to associate the 192.168.0.90 to my MAC address, and in this first attempt, I could not connect to the FritzBox.
- The “primary“ ethernet socket is certainly not broken, because the laptop can connect to it without any problem.
- When I retried now with the “primary” socket, again dhcp does not seem to work: It needs a long time, and then it says something about the ip in the link-local address range. Surprisingly, I still get 192.168.0.90 assigned after a while, but anyway I cannot reach the FritzBox.
My conjecture is that somehow my pc ethernet hardware does not work with the “primary” ethernet socket of the FritzBox while the laptop hardware (which is newer) does. But then I do not understand why it did not work on my first attempt when I connected to a “secondary” ethernet socket.
Anyway, the problem is solved inasmuch as I can connect to the FritzBox now through a “secondary” ethernet socket. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pietinger
Moderator
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 4856
Location: Bavaria
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2024 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mv wrote: | | My conjecture is that somehow my pc ethernet hardware does not work with the “primary” ethernet socket of the FritzBox while the laptop hardware (which is newer) does. |
Maybe this first port is configured to not use DHCP but instead APIPA (for windows user) ... and maybe the distribution on this notebook is also configured to use it (if router offers it) ?
| mv wrote: | | Thanks for your reply. |
You are very Welcome ! 
_________________
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:Pietinger |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mv
Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 6779
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2024 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pietinger wrote: | | mv wrote: | | My conjecture is that somehow my pc ethernet hardware does not work with the “primary” ethernet socket of the FritzBox while the laptop hardware (which is newer) does. |
|
Maybe my memory was wrong: The laptop now does also not connect anymore through the “primary” socket.
Now I wonder whether perhaps this socket is simply broken on my new router. OTOH, the specification says that this socket supports 2.5G while the “secondary” sockets only support 1G. Could it be that some special hardware is needed to connect to a 2.5G socket, or is this a valid reason to complain about a possibly broken router? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pietinger
Moderator
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 4856
Location: Bavaria
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2024 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mv wrote: | | [...] OTOH, the specification says that this socket supports 2.5G while the “secondary” sockets only support 1G. Could it be that some special hardware is needed to connect to a 2.5G socket, or is this a valid reason to complain about a possibly broken router? |
AFAIK every port (on router and machine) which is capable for 2.5G should be also capable for 1G ... but sometimes ... implementation is faulty.
I cannnot answer if the router is broken ... and I dont know how many ports this router has ...the other ports are not enough ? ... maybe you get a machine with a 2.5G port in the future ... maybe you want then use this port ? ... sorry, I cannot say this port is broken ... maybe it is. 
_________________
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:Pietinger |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mv
Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 6779
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 11, 2024 5:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pietinger wrote: | | AFAIK every port (on router and machine) which is capable for 2.5G should be also capable for 1G ... but sometimes ... implementation is faulty. |
Thank you. I can probably live with a non-working 2.5G, but in that case I will complain to the provider anyway and let them decide what to do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
figueroa
Advocate
Joined: 14 Aug 2005
Posts: 3001
Location: Edge of marsh USA
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2024 3:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Internet search yields nothing. What is a primary versus secondary port on a router?
_________________
Andy Figueroa
hp pavilion hpe h8-1260t/2AB5; spinning rust x3
i7-2600 @ 3.40GHz; 16 gb; Radeon HD 7570
amd64/23.0/split-usr/desktop (stable), OpenRC, -systemd -pulseaudio -uefi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mv
Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 6779
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 08, 2024 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| figueroa wrote: | | Internet search yields nothing. What is a primary versus secondary port on a router? |
I am not sure about the technical details: Somehow the first ethernet port is more prioritized on FritzBox routers (even without the 1.5G vs 2.5G difference).
However, it seems that the problem is solved now: I found a configuration option where apparently by default the 2.5G port was disabled. No idea why they set this as a default and apparently did not document it anywhere (at least not visible to me). (Well, I can guess that it is more economic to switch off the 2.5G port if it is not needed, but the fact that this is rather unexpected and not documented costed me so much time.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Networking & Security
