Greetings. I had my dhclient software installed and configured to work with the att@home service. The only thing that it sent was the host-name.
It requested the DNS servers, router, broadcask and netmask information.
As you probably have heard, Att @home, is no longer. Over the wekeend, they changed over to their new network, Att Broadband. Now that all the lights came back up on my General Instrument Surfboard Cable modem, I reboot the machine to get back online. I found that the dhclient software gets all the necesary information (based on the dhclient.leases file) but I cannot get online. In other words, it seems to be working correctly, but I cannot ping anything outside of my box EXCEPT the dns servers.
I'm basically writing to see if anyone else had any similar problems, and how I might correct them.
Also, I have a 4 port hub that they are connected through, however at the time being, no other mahcines are connected to the hub.
> Greetings. I had my dhclient software installed and configured to work > with the > att@home service. The only thing that it sent was the host-name.
> It requested the DNS servers, router, broadcask and netmask > information.
> As you probably have heard, Att @home, is no longer. Over the wekeend, > they > changed over to their new network, Att Broadband. Now that all the > lights came > back up on my General Instrument Surfboard Cable modem, I reboot the > machine > to get back online. I found that the dhclient software gets all the > necesary information > (based on the dhclient.leases file) but I cannot get online. In other > words, it seems to > be working correctly, but I cannot ping anything outside of my box > EXCEPT the dns > servers.
> I'm basically writing to see if anyone else had any similar problems, > and how I might > correct them.
> Also, I have a 4 port hub that they are connected through, however at > the time > being, no other mahcines are connected to the hub.
After MUCH effort/time calling their phone support I did get someone who told me that they do have instances of DHCP problems apparently at various points around the country. My next-door neighbor is up but I am not. I have been issued an IP on a different subne than him. They both are ATTBI IPs.
I was assigned a trouble ticket with no ETA for repair. I can ping a few things on MY WAN subnet, but cannot ping what I am given as the gateway. So in my case, I am trying to find a functional gateway to the Internet.
I can't even get a gateway that works, and have no idea when AT&T will get to "my" problem, which is surely a larger problem. -- ************************************************************************ *Timothy Martin - Argonne National Lab. tjmar...@anl.gov (630)-252-8708* * acoustic/radar wind profiling, Sparc/Solaris, VME/OS-9, PGP * ************************************************************************
I've been through the same thing myself. What is sounds like is this: AT&T switched to a new security protocol that no longer uses hostnames, but instead uses the MAC address of the cable modem. Your cable modem MAC must be "provisioned" onto their network.
To do so, you need to wade through the technical support quagmire and get ahold of one of the real technicians who can put the information through. The field technicians install the modems on the fly, so to speak, by using an internal web site. Unfortunately, I didn't save that site from the other day.
>I've been through the same thing myself. What is sounds like is this: AT&T >switched to a new security protocol that no longer uses hostnames, but >instead uses the MAC address of the cable modem. Your cable modem MAC must >be "provisioned" onto their network.
>To do so, you need to wade through the technical support quagmire and get >ahold of one of the real technicians who can put the information through. >The field technicians install the modems on the fly, so to speak, by using >an internal web site. Unfortunately, I didn't save that site from the other >day.
I've got a friend with an RCA 205 that won't connect. It seems that this is a commom problem with this model, as it is not compatible with headend changes made by ATT. I absolutely can't get through to ATT to report the problem, so I was thinking about purchasing another model modem at CompUSA, Best, or Fry's, and hooking it up myself.
Could I do this? How would I find out the MAC? Is the account number the original account number that I had with Excite? I can't even get through to ATT to find out if I have the same account number. Guess it'll just show up on the bill.
I assume I'd have to do this from a functioning account?
Attbitech wrote: > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:02:34 GMT, "Christopher Baird" > <cbair...@excite.com> wrote:
> >Good Evening,
> >I've been through the same thing myself. What is sounds like is this: AT&T > >switched to a new security protocol that no longer uses hostnames, but > >instead uses the MAC address of the cable modem. Your cable modem MAC must > >be "provisioned" onto their network.
> >To do so, you need to wade through the technical support quagmire and get > >ahold of one of the real technicians who can put the information through. > >The field technicians install the modems on the fly, so to speak, by using > >an internal web site. Unfortunately, I didn't save that site from the other > >day.
I am not sure if the following will help, alas you can give it a try.
This sounded like ATT has changed your network with a new subnet. If your modem is connected through a DHCP server, you might want to reset it to grab a new IP address with the new subnet.
On Monday 10 December 2001 12:02 am, `Christopher Baird' of `cbair...@excite.com' posted on `comp.os.linux.networking'
> I've been through the same thing myself. What is sounds like > is this: AT&T switched to a new security protocol that no > longer uses hostnames, but > instead uses the MAC address of the cable modem. Your cable > modem MAC must be "provisioned" onto their network.
> To do so, you need to wade through the technical support > quagmire and get ahold of one of the real technicians who can > put the information through. The field technicians install the > modems on the fly, so to speak, by using > an internal web site. Unfortunately, I didn't save that site > from the other day.
Bruce, yes you can purchase any DOCSIS cable modem. I was in the same boat with the RCA205. I purchased the SmartOne CMX110 at Fry's for $99 after rebate.
Once home, install the modem. Wait until the CABLE light is on steady. Make sure you don't have an active dialup session. Depending on OS reboot and check to make sure you've received an IP.
Then go to one of 6 site (depending on your region, just try them all). R2 is Bay Area. sites: sas.r?.attbi.com (replace the ? with 1-6). The account number is on your bill and the resource id is the last 9 digits of the account number.
> I've got a friend with an RCA 205 that won't connect. It seems that this is a > commom problem with this model, as it is not compatible with headend changes made > by ATT. I absolutely can't get through to ATT to report the problem, so I was > thinking about purchasing another model modem at CompUSA, Best, or Fry's, and > hooking it up myself.
> Could I do this? How would I find out the MAC? Is the account number the > original account number that I had with Excite? I can't even get through to ATT > to find out if I have the same account number. Guess it'll just show up on the > bill.
> I assume I'd have to do this from a functioning account?
> Thanks, > Bruce Karnacki
> Attbitech wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:02:34 GMT, "Christopher Baird" > > <cbair...@excite.com> wrote:
> > >Good Evening,
> > >I've been through the same thing myself. What is sounds like is this: AT&T > > >switched to a new security protocol that no longer uses hostnames, but > > >instead uses the MAC address of the cable modem. Your cable modem MAC must > > >be "provisioned" onto their network.
> > >To do so, you need to wade through the technical support quagmire and get > > >ahold of one of the real technicians who can put the information through. > > >The field technicians install the modems on the fly, so to speak, by using > > >an internal web site. Unfortunately, I didn't save that site from the other > > >day.
"Jim Sturtevant" <jsturtev...@yahoo.com> writes: > Bruce, yes you can purchase any DOCSIS cable modem. I was in the same boat > with the RCA205. I purchased the SmartOne CMX110 at Fry's for $99 after > rebate.
So why would another DOCSIS modem work when the RCA, which I presume is DOCSIS does not ??
I'm running XP Home and have the RCA 215 modem and a simple factory reset did the trick for me (unplug power, hold the reset button for five or six seconds after connecting the power). Was online for a few websites upon which I would get the famous "DNS Server error" message. I would have to 'repair' the connection through the LAN settings page. That got old REALLY fast so, with a little research on the Microsoft newsgroup (Microsoft site) I found a few less used DNS server addresses locally (Seattle area) and manually entered them into the 'Use the following DNS servers' box in the TCP/IP settings page. So far, I've been online for over a week with no loss in connection and the DL speed is up to 1.8 Mbps. Still short of the 2.9-3.5 Mbps I was getting from @home but it's still far better than dialup. Of course, you will have to find servers located closer to you so you don't suffer low speeds.
This, I have heard, is not the best fix in the long run but until ATTBI fixes their problem, it will have to do.
[POSTED TO comp.dcom.modems.cable - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
In <KlXQ7.25498$ER5.310816@rwcrnsc52> on Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:02:34 GMT,
"Christopher Baird" <cbair...@excite.com> wrote: >I've been through the same thing myself. What is sounds like is this: AT&T >switched to a new security protocol that no longer uses hostnames, but >instead uses the MAC address of the cable modem. Your cable modem MAC must >be "provisioned" onto their network.
Mike Blackford <mblackf...@spamcop.net> wrote: >John Navas wrote:
>> [POSTED TO comp.dcom.modems.cable - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>> In <KlXQ7.25498$ER5.310816@rwcrnsc52> on Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:02:34 GMT, >> "Christopher Baird" <cbair...@excite.com> wrote:
>> >I've been through the same thing myself. What is sounds like is this: AT&T >> >switched to a new security protocol that no longer uses hostnames, but >> >instead uses the MAC address of the cable modem. Your cable modem MAC must >> >be "provisioned" onto their network.
>> Definitely not true in Fremont, California.
>Funny, it does seem to be true in Los Gatos, California.
>The 'Host' and 'Domain' for DNS are irrelevant, since DNS is managed by >DHCP and I specifiy 'No' local DNS settings. The 'Computer name' and >'Workgroup' (name) seem to be irrelevant as well, since changing them >(several times, just for 'fun') has had no effect whatsoever.
It's not TCP/IP Host and Domain; it's the NETBIOS computer name. It probably won't have an effect until the current lease expires.
> [POSTED TO comp.dcom.modems.cable - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
> In <KlXQ7.25498$ER5.310816@rwcrnsc52> on Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:02:34 GMT, > "Christopher Baird" <cbair...@excite.com> wrote:
> >I've been through the same thing myself. What is sounds like is this: AT&T > >switched to a new security protocol that no longer uses hostnames, but > >instead uses the MAC address of the cable modem. Your cable modem MAC must > >be "provisioned" onto their network.
> Definitely not true in Fremont, California.
Funny, it does seem to be true in Los Gatos, California.
The 'Host' and 'Domain' for DNS are irrelevant, since DNS is managed by DHCP and I specifiy 'No' local DNS settings. The 'Computer name' and 'Workgroup' (name) seem to be irrelevant as well, since changing them (several times, just for 'fun') has had no effect whatsoever.
-- "Right knows no boundaries, and justice no frontiers; the brotherhood of man is not a domestic institution." —— Judge Learned Hand (1945) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Zvxr Oynpxsbeq Fvyvpba Inyyrl, Pnyvsbeavn z...@oynpxsbeq.pbz
> In <3C1916AE.86508...@spamcop.net> on Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:59:26 GMT, > Mike Blackford <mblackf...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> >John Navas wrote:
> >> In <KlXQ7.25498$ER5.310816@rwcrnsc52> on Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:02:34 GMT, > >> "Christopher Baird" <cbair...@excite.com> wrote:
> >> >I've been through the same thing myself. What is sounds like is this: AT&T > >> >switched to a new security protocol that no longer uses hostnames, but > >> >instead uses the MAC address of the cable modem. Your cable modem MAC must > >> >be "provisioned" onto their network.
> >> Definitely not true in Fremont, California.
> >Funny, it does seem to be true in Los Gatos, California.
> >The 'Host' and 'Domain' for DNS are irrelevant, since DNS is managed by > >DHCP and I specifiy 'No' local DNS settings. The 'Computer name' and > >'Workgroup' (name) seem to be irrelevant as well, since changing them > >(several times, just for 'fun') has had no effect whatsoever.
> It's not TCP/IP Host and Domain; it's the NETBIOS computer name. It > probably won't have an effect until the current lease expires.
Well, since the lease has been renewed many times since I was reconnected, I doubt it. Everything I've read on the AT&Tbis 'help' pages about manual configuration indicates no dependency at all on either "Computer name" or "Workgroup". Since I munged mine right from the beginning of the 'transition', it seems to be wholly irrelevant (at least where I am in Los Gatos). Even the feedback I've seen that folks say they've gotten from the CSRs indicates there's no dependency. Go figure.
-- "Right knows no boundaries, and justice no frontiers; the brotherhood of man is not a domestic institution." —— Judge Learned Hand (1945) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Zvxr Oynpxsbeq Fvyvpba Inyyrl, Pnyvsbeavn z...@oynpxsbeq.pbz
[POSTED TO comp.dcom.modems.cable - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
In <3C195A9F.7F798...@spamcop.net> on Fri, 14 Dec 2001 01:49:20 GMT,
Mike Blackford <mblackf...@spamcop.net> wrote: >John Navas wrote:
>> In <3C1916AE.86508...@spamcop.net> on Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:59:26 GMT, >> Mike Blackford <mblackf...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>> >John Navas wrote: >> It's not TCP/IP Host and Domain; it's the NETBIOS computer name. It >> probably won't have an effect until the current lease expires.
>Well, since the lease has been renewed many times since I was >reconnected, I doubt it. Everything I've read on the AT&Tbis 'help' >pages about manual configuration indicates no dependency at all on >either "Computer name" or "Workgroup". ...
> [POSTED TO comp.dcom.modems.cable - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
> In <3C195A9F.7F798...@spamcop.net> on Fri, 14 Dec 2001 01:49:20 GMT, > Mike Blackford <mblackf...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>>John Navas wrote:
>>> In <3C1916AE.86508...@spamcop.net> on Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:59:26 GMT, >>> Mike Blackford <mblackf...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>>> >John Navas wrote:
>>> It's not TCP/IP Host and Domain; it's the NETBIOS computer name. It >>> probably won't have an effect until the current lease expires.
>>Well, since the lease has been renewed many times since I was >>reconnected, I doubt it. Everything I've read on the AT&Tbis 'help' >>pages about manual configuration indicates no dependency at all on >>either "Computer name" or "Workgroup". ...
> [POSTED TO comp.dcom.modems.cable - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
> In <3C195A9F.7F798...@spamcop.net> on Fri, 14 Dec 2001 01:49:20 GMT, > Mike Blackford <mblackf...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> >John Navas wrote:
> >> In <3C1916AE.86508...@spamcop.net> on Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:59:26 GMT, > >> Mike Blackford <mblackf...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> >> >John Navas wrote:
> >> It's not TCP/IP Host and Domain; it's the NETBIOS computer name. It > >> probably won't have an effect until the current lease expires.
> >Well, since the lease has been renewed many times since I was > >reconnected, I doubt it. Everything I've read on the AT&Tbis 'help' > >pages about manual configuration indicates no dependency at all on > >either "Computer name" or "Workgroup". ...
-- "Right knows no boundaries, and justice no frontiers; the brotherhood of man is not a domestic institution." —— Judge Learned Hand (1945) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Zvxr Oynpxsbeq Fvyvpba Inyyrl, Pnyvsbeavn z...@oynpxsbeq.pbz
> Then you have serious problems unrelated to ATTBI.
I'm connected to attbi.com just fine. I have carefully not place any xterms or other things over the lower left corner of the screen so I don't miss the appearance of the "Start" button. I had to shrink the mozilla window so it didn't cover up the lower left corner and the knews window always wants to start at +0+0 and is full screen length, but I got it shrunk up so I never block the "Start" button location.
How long does it usually take to get displayed?? Is it truely in the corner (+0-0) or is it actually set in some distance?
Step 27 is disturbing; expose my samba server to the entire ATTBI user community ... that a bit overly trusting don't ya think?
Paul -- The lotto must be rigged, I should have won by now. Modular furniture is cruel and unusual.
rockhead....@bigbox.wan.vpn (Paul Newhouse) writes: > I'm connected to attbi.com just fine. I have carefully > not place any xterms or other things over the lower left > corner of the screen so I don't miss the appearance of the > "Start" button. I had to shrink the mozilla window so it > didn't cover up the lower left corner and the knews window > always wants to start at +0+0 and is full screen length, but > I got it shrunk up so I never block the "Start" button location.
26. Type the Client ID written on your work order* or type your first name
Does that mean that only one Mike in Los Gatos, California can have the service?
Of course not.
The computer name must be something. Some people just won't accept a "go ahead and type anything in there" instruction. So they suggest a Client ID -- which for people who got the service prior to 12/1/01 is going to be an @Home client ID -- or your first name.
If this field actually meant something to the network architecture, they wouldn't risk suggesting that every Mike in the same node can use a computer name of "Mike".
The machine behind my modem is actually a Linksys router. It has no NetBIOS name. None. The Hostname field is blank. And it has no problem at all getting a lease.
There is overwhelming evidence that the system does not use client ID's, and compelling arguments that they use MAC addresses. By the way -- DHCP by client ID is not normal. DHCP normally uses MAC addresses. Older Macintosh systems, and Windows NT 4 pre Service Pack 3 can't even be a DHCP client in a system that uses Client ID.
-- Warren H.
========== Disclaimer: My views reflect those of myself, and not my employer, my friends, nor (as she often tells me) my wife. Any resemblance to the views of anybody living or dead is coincidental. No animals were hurt in the writing of this response -- unless you count my dog who desperately wants to go outside now.
[POSTED TO comp.dcom.modems.cable - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
In <LliS7.47947$ER5.605704@rwcrnsc52> on Fri, 14 Dec 2001 08:01:47 GMT,
"Warren H." <whol...@hotmail.com> wrote: >There is overwhelming evidence that the system does not use client ID's, and >compelling arguments that they use MAC addresses. ...
I don't find the MAC address argument compelling. I experimented on behalf of a friend in Fremont, California, that's been switched over to ATTBI, and had no problem obtaining a DHCP lease when switching between a computer and a SOHO router (SonicWALL).
It's possible that ATTBI has switched to provisioning by DOCSIS. That would make the computer name as well as the MAC address of the host irrelevant.
"Was online for a few websites upon which I would get the famous "DNS Server error" message."
I'm constantly having this problem however both of my neighbors are not! AT&T is no help whatsoever... any ideas on how I can get up and running again. I don't know of any DNS servers in my area, nor do I know how to find them.
I'm almost to the point of canceling their service.... any help would greatly be appreciated.
In article <1yoS7.14893$DD2.134...@typhoon.sonic.net>, John Navas
<spamfil...@navasgroup.com> wrote: > [POSTED TO comp.dcom.modems.cable - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
> In <LliS7.47947$ER5.605704@rwcrnsc52> on Fri, 14 Dec 2001 08:01:47 GMT, > "Warren H." <whol...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >There is overwhelming evidence that the system does not use client ID's, and > >compelling arguments that they use MAC addresses. ...
> I don't find the MAC address argument compelling. I experimented on > behalf of a friend in Fremont, California, that's been switched over to > ATTBI, and had no problem obtaining a DHCP lease when switching between > a computer and a SOHO router (SonicWALL).
I thought it was the MAC address of the modem. I've switched computers also with no problem. Ended up with a different IP address but both worker fine using DHCP and no further information such as computer or network name.
