DNS-320L inconsistent network after shutdowns

[Theo66]

Hello, 
my DNS-320L shows some peculiar behaviour. Every time it shuts down (either a power outage, long press of power button or normal shutdown from webUI), on next boot up it won't be discoverable anywhere. Not shown on connected clients on router, not discovered anywhere on network scans of the network, host unreachable for pings. The ethernet port led won't even light up ever.
Changing eth ports on my router won't help. What DOES help and instantly fixes it every time is picking my second router which I have in bridge mode, connecting it to my first router and then connecting the 320L to the second router.
Then the network leds will light up and the DNS will be accessible everywhere to its usual IP.
Shutting down again will cause the same problem even with the second router, but swapping it on a different port at the second router works and makes it connect again.  

[Hell Fish]

Just a shot in the dark
I'd play with autonegotiation (set it to 100Mb and back or so) to see if anything changes, if you already have a user script add something like "date; ethtool eth0 >> /mnt/sda2/test.log" to see what is happening after boot and compare output when it works

[Theo66]

Nice idea trying to log what eth0 does when it fails to connect. I added this in my user script, works in bash but it doesn't produce produce anything on startup. 
I'm not sure if I have to do anything else for user script to work, just went services->user  then "user" service  -> configure 
use this as script path   /usr/www/cgi-bin/myStartupScript  and "create diagnostics file" checked



exec >> /var/log/user.log 2>&1

case "$1" in
start)
echo "Starting $0"


current_datetime=$(date +'%Y-%m-%d_%H-%M-%S')
log_file="/mnt/sda2/${current_datetime}_test.log"
ethtool eth0 >> "$log_file"

;;
stop)
echo "Stopping $0"
;;
esac


Thanks for the help again!

[Theo66]

Otherwise,
when I have the connection running properly, I ssh the box and this is what ethtool eth0 outputs:


Settings for eth0:
Supported ports: [ TP AUI BNC MII FIBRE ]
Supported link modes:   10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
                        100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
                        1000baseT/Full
Supported pause frame use: No
Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
Advertised link modes:  10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
                        100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
                        1000baseT/Full
Advertised pause frame use: No
Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
Link partner advertised link modes:  10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
                                     100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
Link partner advertised pause frame use: No
Link partner advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
Speed: 100Mb/s
Duplex: Full
Port: MII
PHYAD: 0
Transceiver: external
Auto-negotiation: on
Supports Wake-on: d
Wake-on: d
Link detected: yes

[Theo66]

So I simply added a sleep 30 in my script and run the script from the bash. 
While sleeping, I unplugged the second router and plugged the NAS directly to first router again. 
Waited for my script to stop sleeping and run, and then put the working network configuration back to access the results.

Here it is: 

Settings for eth0:
Supported ports: [ TP AUI BNC MII FIBRE ]
Supported link modes:   10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
                        100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
                        1000baseT/Full
Supported pause frame use: No
Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
Advertised link modes:  10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
                        100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
                        1000baseT/Full
Advertised pause frame use: No
Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes

Speed: 10Mb/s
Duplex: Half

Port: MII
PHYAD: 0
Transceiver: external
Auto-negotiation: on
Supports Wake-on: d
Wake-on: d

Link detected: no

So if you put them in a comparison tool the no connectivity case completely misses these lines:

        Link partner advertised link modes:  10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
                                             100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full        Link partner advertised pause frame use: No

        Link partner advertised auto-negotiation: Yes

Speed is 10Mb/s instead of 100 and Duplex is Half instead of Full. Link detected: no

I think the most telling is link partner (router) doesn't seem to advertise Link modes at all?

[Hell Fish]

"Link detected: no" usually means no physical connection (or really faulty hw somewhere), try reversing the cable, a different cable or a different device with that port on the router, might be hardware issue

10Mb/s Duplex: Half would be the ethernet chip on the NAS on lowest mode possible, waiting to start Auto-negotiation in case it detects a connection

[Theo66]

Thank you for taking the time to answer. Yes indeed everything points to the direction of no physical connection being detected and I wish there was some consistency but I can't find any. I bought a brand new RJ-45 Cat6 and there's the exact same issue.
Any etherenet port on main router works with my desktop and laptops, but none work with the NAS.
The NAS works with any cable and any port on the secondary router.

They just refuse to connect to each other directly. 
I will research auto-negotiation when I have more time as this is the only possible explanation with what I've seen so far. 
"In some cases auto-negotiation issues may prevent the link from being established at all leading to lack of connectivity."

This is an ISP provided router and I wouldn't be surprised if it was found lacking.
At least it's working reliably now with this workaround!

[Bert K]

How about checking DHCP settings?  If the main router is a DHCP server, maybe it's not reaching through to the second router Lan ports.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Alt-F" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to alt-f+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/alt-f/bd58f296-531a-4945-ab13-e3635ea17b4an%40googlegroups.com.

[Bert K]

Reading the problem again, maybe the NAS is set for a static IP and is in a different subnet from pc's/laptops.

On Wed, Oct 18, 2023, 4:10 PM Theo66 <theodo...@gmail.com> wrote:

--