Ad hoc won't connect

[nikkkko]

I am trying to connect two computers in ad hoc mode, sharing an internet connection. Both computers are running XP.

The ICS host computer is connected to the net by dsl dial up and this connection is shared, following these instructions:

http://practicallynetworked.com/sharing/xp_ics/serverdialup.htm

The ICS client computer was configured following these instructions:

http://practicallynetworked.com/sharing/xp_ics/clientwiz.htm

The ad hoc network was configured following these instructions:

http://practicallynetworked.com/support/adhoc_setup.htm

My problem is that the client can see the network, connecting and displaying the MAC address of the host adaptor correctly, but the host cannot see the client.

Both host and client have IP numbers beginning with 169. and I gather this is not good.

A further complication is that the network monitoring utility which came with the client adaptor, (USB SMC 2662W), shows a link quality at between 3 and 10% even thought the computers are side by side, although I'm not sure this means anything as when I disconnect the host adaptor arial, (Realtek RTL8180), the monitor shows no link quality change.

Any help would be greatly appreciated,

nikkkko

[JackMDS]

Welcome to the Network Forum.

169.xxx.xxx.xxx means that you do not have a connection between the two computers.

Switch ICS Off forget for a moment about the Internet and concentrate on establishing working Ad-Hoc connection between the two computers.

Start by putting the two computers 12” apart disabling all Wireless filters and firewalls and configure the Wireless according to the manual.

Only when the Wireless works configure the ICS and Internet.

When it works OK start to move away from the Wireless source to see when it stops working again which would indicate the max distance of you Wireless.

The foolowing pages was written for infrastructure Wireless (not Ad-Hoc) but it will give you the gist of the process.

Link to: Wireless - Basic Configuration. (http://www.ezlan.net/Wireless_Config.html)

Link: Wireless Security for the Home User. (http://www.ezlan.net/Wireless_Security.html)

:cool:

[nikkkko]

Thanks for the post.

OK, internet connection off, ICS off, all filters and firewalls off, even the client machine off. Switch on the host machine, XP finds the wireless network connection and gives it a 169 ip address. Why? TCP/IP is set to optain IP and DNS server address automatically, under the advanced tab DHCP is shown as enabled. Shouldn't I get a 192.168. address?

Clearly I have something set wrong but am at a loss to figure out what. I have been running permutations on this network for about three years without a hitch and now I'm stuck.

[JackMDS]

It will get 192.168.x.x if you have a DHCP server that gives it (like most Cable/DSL Router) otherwise its assigns 169.x.x.x that id the default of Windows in the absence of a connection to a DHCP server.

What is DSL Dial Up?

Do you have an External DSL Modem or an Internal One?

Does it use PPPOE?

The pages on the mentioned above are Very Good.

May be you can take a look int this too:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/expert/bowman_02april08.mspx?pf=trueHi

:D

[nikkkko]

To answer your questions, I use an Alcatel USB Speedtouch modem to connect using a dial up service. Connection uses PPP.

I've been using this for about a year, (had a slightly different wireless network going for the same period), but now looking at your query, it does appear that this connection is configured as an ISDN type. Looking into this with my service provide. Which is in France where I live.

I have also read the guide you link to and followed the directions to the letter with no luck.

More background: previously I was running a wireless network without WZC. Host ran the SMC adaptor and laptop ran a Belkin adaptor. Everything fine. Then I buy Realtek PCI wireless adaptor for the host box so that I can free up a USB slot and move the SMC adaptor to my new Linux box and add this to the network. New Realtek adaptor insists on using WZC but Belkin cannot see let alone connect to the new network. So, to get things going, I (temporarily) put the SMC adaptor on my laptop, (removing Belkin and all software components first), and that's where I'm at. SMC can see the network, but Realtek can't see SMC. Pinging one to the other produces timeouts only.

I also have an Intel network access point somewhere in a box which I used to use when I had more boxes on the network. The reason I do not currently use this connected directly to the modem is because the modem was shipped with a USB connector and my NAP supporst only ethernet.

And I thought it would take me ten minutes to get this going.

[nikkkko]

I think I'm getting to the bottom of this...

I pulled the access point out of a cupboard, plugged it in to the host computer, (i.e. wired), and disabled the Realtek adaptor. The access point, (Intel Wireless Gateway), can be configured to run a DHCP service or not. Configured with service on, hey presto, wireless network comes alive and all machines can see each other, IP addresses set courtesy of Intel. But I can't get out to the internet through client computers because the internet connection is through the host computer. However, when I disable the DHCP service on the access point and restart everything with ICS enabled, my host computer defaults to a 169 IP address as does the client machine. In other words, ICS is failing to supply 192.xxx.xxx.xxx IP addresses.

Now if I can only figure out why...

[nikkkko]

... and finally...

I now know it was an ICS/DHCP problem. Basically, DHCP was not serving IP addresses properly for reasons I know not. However, with a lot of starting and stopping of the DHCP service from services.msc , choosing to disable and then re-enable ICS on the connection and re-setting TCP/IP settings on the client, (to manual and then back to automatic), it now works again.

What I have learnt from this diversion is that ICS is perhaps not the best way of serving IP addresses.

Now back to work... where was I?

[JackMDS]

Glad you solved the problem.

I wish I could help more, however I am not familiar with your type of Internet connection.

:cool: