problem - maybe due to 3Com Wireless DSL router?
Duncan Di Saudelli
Question: Why does one of my PCs load web pages flawlessly whereas the other
one, all of a sudden, doesn't?
Background: My router, via NAT, serves two computers. The two computers run
Windows XP and connect via Wi-Fi to the router. The router serves out IP
addresses to the two computers via DHCP. The firewall in the router is
enables and it stops ICMP amongst other things.
The router is a 3Com officeconnect and, up until a couple of days ago when I
installed Mozilla thunderbird, all was well.
Now, however, all is not well. Dowstairs PC continues to work flawlessly as
ever. Upstairs PC will sometimes load webpages, sometimes will refuse to
load the same webpage, or will partially load a page minus the images. This
is the case with the 3Com's firewll enabled.
If I disable the router firewall, the downstairs PC continues to work
flawleslly and now, so does the upstairs PC.
On the upstairs PC, disabling Windows firewall and also Zonealarm and
confirming that no ZA services are running results in the same situation as
having the whole lot running - web pages load properly if teh router
firewall is "off", and don't load properly if the router firewall is "on".
(For reference, the downstairs PC has the Windows Firewall enabled, but no
other firewall software).
So, having checked the router firewall rules, there isn't anything that I
can see singles out the upstairs from the downstairs PC.
I've uninstalled Thunderbird - I think that the installation being
cnincident withthese problems is a red herring but I'm not an expert - and
the upstairs PC still fails to load web pages correctly.
The problem persists in IE7 and in firefox - I have checked the settings in
both, disabled add-ons i firefox, done a variety of tests and can't ID the
cause of the problem. No malware that I can find (spybot S&D, WMSRT,SAS),
all my IPCONFIG settings look right, I can ping anything from either
machine...
Can anyone suggest where I might need to look please?
DDS
Roger Mills
It's a mystery! I don't know the answer - but if you find it, please let me
know because I've got more or less the same problem.
We have 2 PCs, both running Win XP SP2, and both hard wired to the same sort
of 3Com router as yours. Some while ago - maybe a couple of years - my spam
screening program (Mailwasher) plus my Outlook email client suddenly stopped
working on my PC. The only way I could get them to work was to turn off the
router's firewall - and it has remained off ever since.
I've just turned it on again and - with it on - Mailwasher etc. no longer
work, just as before. *However*, I've just tried Mailwasher on my wife's
computer while the firewall was on and - blow me - it works ok! So I presume
that there must be some subtle difference somewhere in the network settings
between our two computers, but I've no idea what. I wonder if there's a clue
in your reference to Firebird? I run Mozilla Firefox as my default browser,
whereas my wife only uses IE, and Firefox isn't installed on her PC.
--
Cheers,
Roger
______
Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly
monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks.
PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP!
Duncan Di Saudelli
>> Question: Why does one of my PCs load web pages flawlessly whereas
>> the other one, all of a sudden, doesn't?
...<snip>...
> It's a mystery! I don't know the answer - but if you find it, please let
> me know because I've got more or less the same problem...<snip>...I wonder
> if there's a clue in your reference to Firebird? I run Mozilla Firefox as
> my default browser, whereas my wife only uses IE, and Firefox isn't
> installed on her PC.
I seem to have fixed the problem on the "upstairs" PC - but the method seems
unlikely to be related to the cause. I deleted the Firefox profile, started
Firefox isn safe mode and returned it to its normal startup basic settings,
created another profile and now it seems to be working normally!
Might it be worth you doing an experiment - install IE on your "broken" PC
and install FF on your wifes'? Then see if the problem moves with the
browser perhaps ...
I tried restoring the 3Com settings to a known earlier configuration from a
few months ago, by the way (frgot to mention it in my earlier post) - that
made no difference to my problem.
My vague guess (bearing in mind I don't know a fat lot about any of this )
is the the XP "hosts" file is addressed differently in some way and maybe it
relates to the NAT lookup table in the router or something . It's all a bit
beyond me. (My machines are both XPSP3, up-to-date, by the way).
I'm about to reboot (again) and do some more tests. If the situation remains
fixed then that's that! But if I run into further problems i.e. the "delete
FF profile" approach turns out NOT to be a fix, I'll report back.
let us know how you get on, should you decide to try different browsers in
different machines.
DDS
Roger Mills
Duncan Di Saudelli <n...@home.com> wrote:
Thanks for your feedback. I've posted a question in the Firefox support
forum, to see whether there are any known issues which may be relevant.
Meanwhile, I'm going to try to narrow the problem down by, for example,
seeing whether email works with the firewall on, from a clean boot without
Firefox being started. I've already confirmed that simply exiting Firefox
*doesn't* fix it.
Roger Mills
>
> Thanks for your feedback. I've posted a question in the Firefox
> support forum, to see whether there are any known issues which may be
> relevant. Meanwhile, I'm going to try to narrow the problem down by,
> for example, seeing whether email works with the firewall on, from a
> clean boot without Firefox being started. I've already confirmed that
> simply exiting Firefox *doesn't* fix it.
Update: Fresh boot, no browsers running, email works with firewall on. Start
up IE (not even Firefox) and email stops working.
So it looks as if *any* internet activity triggers this problem, and that it
probably has nothing to do with Firefox per se.
I haven't a clue where we go from here!
Duncan Di Saudelli
>> support forum,
> So it looks as if *any* internet activity triggers this problem, and that
> it probably has nothing to do with Firefox per se.
> I haven't a clue where we go from here!
Nor me, I'm afraid. I can only say the obvious things (check out the
microsoft news server for appropriate groups, Google, maybe as a
stab-in-the-dark guess try searching for "net" commands, ARP cache, hosts
file stuff).
Best of luck and please do post back if/when you find more evidence.
DDS
Ato_Zee
> > So it looks as if *any* internet activity triggers this problem, and
> > that
> > it probably has nothing to do with Firefox per se.
When internet connection dies on one machine but not another,
see if the dead one can ping www.google.com both by
name and dotted quad IP address.
209.85.229.106 (not sure if Google change this
occasionally, but you get the idea, you can do the ping
to get the IP address on the good machine)
Next do an ipconfig /all on both machines and compare
the results.
Compare the hosts files.
And one common problem is too high an MTU sdetting,
there are free utilities to fix this problem.
Usually when things go pear shaped I just restore
the OS in under 5 mins from the original image, plus
the differential image taken when things worked.
You just select the differential image of appropriate
date. It helps if the OS is on its own drive or partition,
with data, emails, bookmarks, newsgroups etc on another.
The Natural Philosopher
> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
> Roger Mills <watt....@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for your feedback. I've posted a question in the Firefox
>> support forum, to see whether there are any known issues which may be
>> relevant. Meanwhile, I'm going to try to narrow the problem down by,
>> for example, seeing whether email works with the firewall on, from a
>> clean boot without Firefox being started. I've already confirmed that
>> simply exiting Firefox *doesn't* fix it.
>
> Update: Fresh boot, no browsers running, email works with firewall on. Start
> up IE (not even Firefox) and email stops working.
>
> So it looks as if *any* internet activity triggers this problem, and that it
> probably has nothing to do with Firefox per se.
>
> I haven't a clue where we go from here!
Try setting MTU to 1400.
I've had this sort of behavior intermittently when my internet 'goes
bad;' and some large packets get fragmented, and a piece never arrives.
I've also had very strange problems a bit like this cured by a router
firmware update.
The Natural Philosopher
>>> So it looks as if *any* internet activity triggers this problem, and
>>> that
>>> it probably has nothing to do with Firefox per se.
>
> When internet connection dies on one machine but not another,
> see if the dead one can ping www.google.com both by
> name and dotted quad IP address.
> 209.85.229.106 (not sure if Google change this
> occasionally, but you get the idea, you can do the ping
> to get the IP address on the good machine)
> Next do an ipconfig /all on both machines and compare
> the results.
> Compare the hosts files.
> And one common problem is too high an MTU sdetting,
> there are free utilities to fix this problem.
I half agree.
Too high an MTU should not cause things to crap out, but it does,
because some upstream router or switch is mangling packet fragmentation
and defragmentation.
So its not a local problem, its a remote problem, that has not a local
FIX, but a local *workaround*.
Fixing a crash on the M25 is clearing away the bodies, car and human,
and cleaning and repairing the road surface. Driving across london, is a
workaround ;-)
> Usually when things go pear shaped I just restore
> the OS in under 5 mins from the original image, plus
> the differential image taken when things worked.
> You just select the differential image of appropriate
> date. It helps if the OS is on its own drive or partition,
> with data, emails, bookmarks, newsgroups etc on another.
I just go :-
#ifconfig eth0 mtu 1400
Takes about 10 seconds.;-)
However its not the only problem that can cause these effects. Sometimes
the routers NAT cache seems to get screwed. Rebooting the router and
the client PC's will fix that for a while.
Roger Mills
>>> So it looks as if *any* internet activity triggers this problem, and
>>> that
>>> it probably has nothing to do with Firefox per se.
>
> When internet connection dies on one machine but not another,
> see if the dead one can ping www.google.com both by
> name and dotted quad IP address.
But the internet connection *isn't* dying - browsing works ok - it's just
email that dies when the router's firewall is on, returning an 800ccc0e
error when I try to connect to any pop server.
On my other PCs, email works with the router's firewall is *on*. Any clues?
Roger Mills
I've reduced MTU to 1400 - but it makes no difference. Any other ideas?
[Please see my other post (about 2 minutes ago) for a fuller description of
the problem]
alexd
chose the tried and tested strategy of:
> But the internet connection *isn't* dying - browsing works ok - it's just
> email that dies when the router's firewall is on, returning an 800ccc0e
> error when I try to connect to any pop server.
Testing the POP connection with telnet will hopefully give more meaningful
diagnostics than that error number. Google for pop3 telnet.
--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEs...@ale.cx)
21:20:58 up 12:31, 3 users, load average: 0.25, 0.15, 0.10
"Stupid is a condition. Ignorance is a choice" -- Wiley Miller
Ato_Zee
On 18-Oct-2009, "Roger Mills" <watt....@googlemail.com> wrote:
> But the internet connection *isn't* dying - browsing works ok - it's just
> email that dies when the router's firewall is on, returning an 800ccc0e
> error when I try to connect to any pop server.
>
> On my other PCs, email works with the router's firewall is *on*. Any
> clues?
And if you swap router ports does the problem stay with
the PC or with the router port?
If it is the router then the problem should stay with
the router poirt, since you haven't changed anything
on the router.
If it is the PC's config then it should stay with the PC.
It could be is a port problem with the email port.,
Graham J
"Ato_Zee" <ato...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:FWKCm.51211$Wx3....@newsfe20.ams2...
By extension, if you replace the router with another of different make
andthe problem goes away then is must have been the router.
--
Graham J
Roger Mills
> Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.broadband Job Justification Hearings,
> Roger Mills chose the tried and tested strategy of:
>
>
>> But the internet connection *isn't* dying - browsing works ok - it's
>> just email that dies when the router's firewall is on, returning an
>> 800ccc0e error when I try to connect to any pop server.
>
> Testing the POP connection with telnet will hopefully give more
> meaningful diagnostics than that error number. Google for pop3 telnet.
No, it just said Telnet was unable to establish a connection to the server -
didn't get as far as allowing me to enter a username and password.
Roger Mills
Ato_Zee <ato...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 18-Oct-2009, "Roger Mills" <watt....@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> But the internet connection *isn't* dying - browsing works ok - it's
>> just email that dies when the router's firewall is on, returning an
>> 800ccc0e error when I try to connect to any pop server.
>>
>> On my other PCs, email works with the router's firewall is *on*. Any
>> clues?
>
> And if you swap router ports does the problem stay with
> the PC or with the router port?
> If it is the router then the problem should stay with
> the router poirt, since you haven't changed anything
> on the router.
It stays with the PC - which doesn't work on any of the router's ports, even
though my other PCs do.
> If it is the PC's config then it should stay with the PC.
> It could be is a port problem with the email port.,
On doing some more experiments, I find that - in fact - it's just Plusnet's
email server that it can't connect to - it's ok with
Freeserve/Wanadoo/Orange. And it's just the pop server. I can *send* emails
via Plusnet's smtp server with the firewall on. The Plusnet accounts are set
up in exactly the same way as on the PCs which do work, all using the
standard port (110).
So why should just one PC refuse to connect to Plusnet's POP server when the
firewall is on, while the other PCs are ok? [This happens in Outlook *and*
Mailwasher - and I don't think that I'm likely to have set all my Plusnet
accounts up wrong on both applications on just one PC]
Duncan Di Saudelli
>>> But the internet connection *isn't* dying - browsing works ok - it's
>>> just email that dies when the router's firewall is on, returning an
>>> 800ccc0e error when I try to connect to any pop server.
>>
>> Testing the POP connection with telnet will hopefully give more
>> meaningful diagnostics than that error number. Google for pop3 telnet.
>
> No, it just said Telnet was unable to establish a connection to the
> server - didn't get as far as allowing me to enter a username and
> password.
In my book (not a terribly well written one, I admit), then I'd be gettig
close to the page titled "how to do a clean reinstall of the OS without
overwriting installed programs and documents".
As someone else said, it gets to the stage where you can spend more time
finding a way to correct the fault than it would take you to reestablish a
"fresh" OS.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/315341/
Again, please let us know how you get on
DDS
The Natural Philosopher
> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
> alexd <trof...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.broadband Job Justification Hearings,
>> Roger Mills chose the tried and tested strategy of:
>>
>>
>>> But the internet connection *isn't* dying - browsing works ok - it's
>>> just email that dies when the router's firewall is on, returning an
>>> 800ccc0e error when I try to connect to any pop server.
>> Testing the POP connection with telnet will hopefully give more
>> meaningful diagnostics than that error number. Google for pop3 telnet.
>
> No, it just said Telnet was unable to establish a connection to the server -
> didn't get as far as allowing me to enter a username and password.
you need to use port 110 for telnet
eg
telnet pop3.myisp.net 110
The Natural Philosopher
All I can think is the routers NAT tables are borked.
Or you have a firewall rule preventing outbound pop3 connections from a
specific machine.
The Natural Philosopher
not the currently assigned one, and see if that makes a difference.
Roger Mills
I'm aready doing that!
Roger Mills
Not knowingly! How can I check?
Roger Mills
>>
>>
> change to a fixed IP address on the offending PC that is in range, but
> not the currently assigned one, and see if that makes a difference.
I'm already using fixed IP addresses (always have) but will try a different
one to soo whether that makes any difference.
Ato_Zee
> I'm already using fixed IP addresses (always have) but will try a
> different
> one to soo whether that makes any difference.
Either restore from a backup image to a time when it
worked, if it ever did, or use Wireshark (son of Ethereal)
free packet monitor, to see what is going out and what
is coming back, and why one ISP responds differently
to another. Maybe the different ISP's don't respond
differently, and for some reason the affected PC
is sensitive to a specific IP address.
Sometimes packet sniffing comes in useful.
The Natural Philosopher
> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
> The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>
>> change to a fixed IP address on the offending PC that is in range, but
>> not the currently assigned one, and see if that makes a difference.
>
> I'm already using fixed IP addresses (always have) but will try a different
> one to soo whether that makes any difference.
try swapping the machines IP addresses over.
See if the problem is with the machines software, or with the IP address.
Frankly if it occurs when the router's firewall is turned on, I cant see
how it can be the machines' software setup..but you never know.
Its worth eliminating that anyway.
Roger Mills
Thanks for that suggestion. Could you please elaborate a little more on how
I get and use Wireshark.
It's not really an option to restore to a point before the problem happened,
since this has been going on for nearly 2 years - and I had forgotten about
it and just run with the firewall off until the creator of this thread
reminded me of the problem.
I've just changed the offending PC's IP address - and it makes absolutely no
difference!
I thought I had found something yesterday when I found that the PC in
question had an outdated LMHOSTS file, holding a set of IP addresses for all
the PCs in my network from a different range from the one I currently use. I
was hopeful that deleting this file would fix the problem - but it didn't!
But a bit more information on how to go about packet monitoring - which is
outside my current experience - would be appreciated.
The Natural Philosopher
LMHOSTS is for netbios stuff only.
Not needed if you have peer to perr window shares set up all on one network.
You MIGHT have a HOSTS file with e,g. an outdated address for the pop
server.
Have a look in c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc
And edit out anything that looks suspicious.
Hmm. get a dos command shell up and try PING ing the pop3 server, and
see if its trying to ping the same address from both machines.
with the firewall enabled that is.
Ato_Zee
On 20-Oct-2009, "Roger Mills" <watt....@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Sometimes packet sniffing comes in useful.
>
> Thanks for that suggestion. Could you please elaborate a little more on
> how
> I get and use Wireshark.
http://www.wireshark.org/
And a Google for Wireshark will throw up the free
download, the tutorials, help, documentation, etc.
Its forerunner frequently appeared on UK magazine
cover DVD's under networking tools.
Is is one of the products of choice of those
looking for, and at, the contents of unsecured
wireless networks.
Essentially it decodes the packets going in and
out of your computer, and writes them to a log.
So ping something and it becomes an echo
request.
Addressing queries become "who has" packets
to resolve addresses.
DHCP requests show lease times for the
IP address, and renewal requests.
There is a bit of a learning curve, but you
soon get the hang of what's under the bonnet
of the internet and how it works.
It is such a useful tool that there are a lot of
forums covering it.
It also alerts you to how careful you need be
about your security. If you have a wireless
connection it can reveal your ISP, if you are running
an Apple laptop, in fact anything in plain unencrypted
form. Which is why you shouldn't use an unencrypted
wireless network. Mines wired CAT5.
Roger Mills
>
> You MIGHT have a HOSTS file with e,g. an outdated address for the pop
> server.
>
> Have a look in c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc
> And edit out anything that looks suspicious.
>
>
My hosts file has nearly 5000 lines, each starting with 127.0.0.1 - but
nothing poiting at my POP server.
>
> Hmm. get a dos command shell up and try PING ing the pop3 server, and
> see if its trying to ping the same address from both machines.
>
> with the firewall enabled that is.
>
>
Yes - same address from both machines, with or without the firewall enabled.
Roger Mills
Ato_Zee <ato...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Thanks - I'll have a go, but it sounds like it might be time-consuming, so
I'll have to wait for a suitable opportunity.
Meanwhile, I've discovered the following:
* I *can* establish a telnet session to port 110 of Plusnet's POP3 server
from the offending PC with the firewall on (I previously thought I couldn't)
* I can access my emails on the offending PC with the firewall on by using
IMAP rather than POP3
* As previously reported, POP3 works ok from other PCs with the firewall on,
*and* works with a different POP3 server on the offending PC - just not with
Plusnet's server
* When I telnet to Plusnet's POP3 server, log in and list my messages, it
says:
"+OK POP3 clients that break here, they violate STD53." before listing the
mesages.
This is from both PCs, and is independent of whether the firewall is on or
not. What the hell does this mean?
[If I do the the same with the Freeserve/Orange/Wanadoo server, it says:
"+OK scan listing follows" - which sounds a bit more reasonable!]
alexd
chose the tried and tested strategy of:
> "+OK POP3 clients that break here, they violate STD53." before listing the
> mesages.
>
> This is from both PCs, and is independent of whether the firewall is on or
> not. What the hell does this mean?
>
> [If I do the the same with the Freeserve/Orange/Wanadoo server, it says:
> "+OK scan listing follows" - which sounds a bit more reasonable!]
Google it.
--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEs...@ale.cx)
16:29:15 up 2 days, 8:18, 4 users, load average: 0.16, 0.26, 0.20
The Natural Philosopher
> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
> The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> You MIGHT have a HOSTS file with e,g. an outdated address for the pop
>> server.
>>
>> Have a look in c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc
>> And edit out anything that looks suspicious.
>>
>>
> My hosts file has nearly 5000 lines, each starting with 127.0.0.1 - but
> nothing poiting at my POP server.
>
WHAT!!!
you dont need it anyway!
>> Hmm. get a dos command shell up and try PING ing the pop3 server, and
>> see if its trying to ping the same address from both machines.
>>
>> with the firewall enabled that is.
>>
>>
> Yes - same address from both machines, with or without the firewall enabled.
>
And do the pings work or not work with the firewall enabled or not?
>
The Natural Philosopher
Now he tells us..
> * I can access my emails on the offending PC with the firewall on by using
> IMAP rather than POP3
> * As previously reported, POP3 works ok from other PCs with the firewall on,
> *and* works with a different POP3 server on the offending PC - just not with
> Plusnet's server
ahh..
> * When I telnet to Plusnet's POP3 server, log in and list my messages, it
> says:
>
> "+OK POP3 clients that break here, they violate STD53." before listing the
> mesages.
>
> This is from both PCs, and is independent of whether the firewall is on or
> not. What the hell does this mean?
>
fuck nose. No one reads that stuff ever, except eejits like us who
telnet into pop ports ;-)
> [If I do the the same with the Freeserve/Orange/Wanadoo server, it says:
> "+OK scan listing follows" - which sounds a bit more reasonable!]
Ok. So there is something about one PC's mail setup that must be using a
non standard port since 110 works from both at all times.
whats the mail agent, bloody outlook milk train?
Roger Mills
> Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.broadband Job Justification Hearings,
> Roger Mills chose the tried and tested strategy of:
>
>> "+OK POP3 clients that break here, they violate STD53." before
>> listing the mesages.
>>
>> This is from both PCs, and is independent of whether the firewall is
>> on or not. What the hell does this mean?
>>
>> [If I do the the same with the Freeserve/Orange/Wanadoo server, it
>> says: "+OK scan listing follows" - which sounds a bit more
>> reasonable!]
>
> Google it.
Have now done so - and it appears to be a standard 'feature' of some pop
server software - and probably not significant in my case.
Roger Mills
The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Roger Mills wrote:
>> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
>> The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> You MIGHT have a HOSTS file with e,g. an outdated address for the
>>> pop server.
>>>
>>> Have a look in c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc
>>> And edit out anything that looks suspicious.
>>>
>>>
>> My hosts file has nearly 5000 lines, each starting with 127.0.0.1 -
>> but nothing poiting at my POP server.
>>
>
> WHAT!!!
>
> you dont need it anyway!
>
Indeed - I've already renamed the file - but haven't yet re-booted so it
will still be using the old version. I'll see whether anything changes after
a re-boot - but I'm not optimistic!
>>> Hmm. get a dos command shell up and try PING ing the pop3 server,
>>> and see if its trying to ping the same address from both machines.
>>>
>>> with the firewall enabled that is.
>>>
>>>
>> Yes - same address from both machines, with or without the firewall
>> enabled.
> And do the pings work or not work with the firewall enabled or not?
Yes, the pings work on both machines, with and without the firewall enabled.
Roger Mills
Well that's what it look like - except that all the email accounts *are* set
up to use standard ports.
> whats the mail agent, bloody outlook milk train?
I'm using Outlook 2000 (not Outlook Express) - but I get the same problem
with Mailwasher on the problematic PC when the firewall's on.
One thing I reported earlier, which may be significant - but no-one picked
up on - is that if I reboot and don't start any browsers, Mailwasher and
Outlook work ok on the problem PC with the firewall on. But as soon as I
start a browser - and it doesn't matter whether it's IE or Firefox, my email
clients no longer work until I turn off the firewall.
Plusnet Support Team
AFAIK, it's the bog standard response from the mail collection software
we use (Courier).
It's basically saying that if things break, it's probably because the
client is violating something in this lot -
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/std/std53.html
Your messages are being listed so there doesn't look to be anything wrong.
> [If I do the the same with the Freeserve/Orange/Wanadoo server, it says:
> "+OK scan listing follows" - which sounds a bit more reasonable!]
--
|Bob Pullen Broadband Solutions for
|Support Home & Business @
|Plusnet Plc. www.plus.net
+--------------- twitter.com/plusnet ----------------
The Natural Philosopher
>
>
> One thing I reported earlier, which may be significant - but no-one picked
> up on - is that if I reboot and don't start any browsers, Mailwasher and
> Outlook work ok on the problem PC with the firewall on. But as soon as I
> start a browser - and it doesn't matter whether it's IE or Firefox, my email
> clients no longer work until I turn off the firewall.
That is truly screwy.
IE probably screws around with the underlying network. Anything is
possible with IE, but firefaux shouldn't.
You may have a virus of some sort...I fear.
Roger Mills
>> Bob Pullen Broadband Solutions for
>> Support Home & Business @
>> Plusnet Plc. www.plus.net
> +--------------- twitter.com/plusnet ----------------
Yes, I'd come to the same conclusion - thanks.
But I'm still looking for *any* clues as to why just one of my PCs can't
collect mail from mail.plus.net with my router's firewall on, whilst my
other PCs (all hard-wired to the router with CAT5 cable) can. Even the
offending PC can collect mail from the Freeserve/Orange/Wanadoo pop server.
Any ideas?
The Natural Philosopher
> But I'm still looking for *any* clues as to why just one of my PCs can't
> collect mail from mail.plus.net with my router's firewall on, whilst my
> other PCs (all hard-wired to the router with CAT5 cable) can. Even the
> offending PC can collect mail from the Freeserve/Orange/Wanadoo pop server.
>
> Any ideas?
>
Well we are down to the conclusion, that that machine is using ports
that you don't know about for nefarious purposes of its own.
Virus scanner?
Roger Mills
Well, I've had AVG active throughout, and that hasn't found anything.
Also, Plusnet don't allow the use of any port other than 110 when collecting
mail from their mail server, so if that was the problem, it wouldn't work
with the firewall *off* either!
Plusnet Support Team
Roger Mills wrote:
> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
> The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Roger Mills wrote:
>>
>>> But I'm still looking for *any* clues as to why just one of my PCs
>>> can't collect mail from mail.plus.net with my router's firewall on,
>>> whilst my other PCs (all hard-wired to the router with CAT5 cable)
>>> can. Even the offending PC can collect mail from the
>>> Freeserve/Orange/Wanadoo pop server. Any ideas?
>>>
>> Well we are down to the conclusion, that that machine is using ports
>> that you don't know about for nefarious purposes of its own.
>>
>> Virus scanner?
>
> Well, I've had AVG active throughout, and that hasn't found anything.
>
> Also, Plusnet don't allow the use of any port other than 110 when collecting
> mail from their mail server, so if that was the problem, it wouldn't work
> with the firewall *off* either!
When collecting email using *POP3*
As you've alluded to elsewhere in this thread, we also offer IMAP over
port 143.
--
Plusnet Support Team
Roger Mills wrote:
> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
I find it odd that IMAP still works. This points to it being port/proxy
related although that doesn't explain why you don't have the problem
with other email accounts.
The first thing I'd try is disabling Mailwasher/any other email
filtering/proxying applications and try setting the Plusnet account up
in a different email client (Thunderbird instead of Outlook?).
It might also be worth you using the VIP of our mail server as opposed
to the host name in case something weird's happening with your DNS
resolution. Instead of mail.plus.net, try 212.159.9.81.
Roger Mills
> Roger Mills wrote:
>>
>> Also, Plusnet don't allow the use of any port other than 110 when
>> collecting mail from their mail server, so if that was the problem,
>> it wouldn't work with the firewall *off* either!
>
> When collecting email using *POP3*
>
Yes, indeed.
> As you've alluded to elsewhere in this thread, we also offer IMAP over
> port 143.
>
Yes, and that still works with the firewall *on*. Problem is that Mailwasher
(or the version I'm using, anyway) can't use IMAP - so if take that route, I
can't use it to screen my messages before downloading them.
Spamtastic Spastic
shat out:
Out of curiosity - does your 'mailwasher' software require your firewall
to give it permission to access your network? I'm not familiar with it,
but a quick glance at the website seems to suggest that *it* downloads
the mail from the POP server ignoring/deleting those that are spam?
So does it act as some kind of proxy *to* outlook?
--
political correctness: The safety net protecting deaf blind disabled
ethnic minority gays & lesbians with odd religious beliefs from reality
Spamtastic Spastic
spaghetti and shat out:
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 11:27:34 +0100, Roger Mills ate alphabet spaghetti
> and shat out:
>
> Out of curiosity - does your 'mailwasher' software require your firewall
> to give it permission to access your network? I'm not familiar with it,
> but a quick glance at the website seems to suggest that *it* downloads
> the mail from the POP server ignoring/deleting those that are spam?
>
> So does it act as some kind of proxy *to* outlook?
Scrub that - I've found this:
Normally this is how you would use Mailwasher with your email program,
* Open MailWasher
* Click, Check Mail,
* Mark your email for deletion or keeping,
* Click Process Mail,
* Then you open, (or Mailwasher Opens ) your email program,
* Click Send/Receive in there to check for new mail like normal.
Just leave MailWasher open to collect all your email, and turn off
automatic checking in your email program http://support.firetrust.com/
index.php?_m=knowledgebase&_a=viewarticle&k... this will ensure
MailWasher gets all your email first so you can remove the junk before it
gets to your computer.
So it polls the server in addition to the mail client.
Ignore me - I've lost the plot.
Roger Mills
Yes, that's precisely how it works. However, on this problem PC, Mailwasher
won't work with Plusnet accounts with the router'e firewall on (the other
PC's are ok, and Mailwasher works ok with Orange's pop server) - so I'm
stuffed unless I turn the firewall off.
Dave Saville
<watt....@googlemail.com> wrote:
> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
> The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Roger Mills wrote:
> >> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
> >> The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >>> You MIGHT have a HOSTS file with e,g. an outdated address for the
> >>> pop server.
> >>>
> >>> Have a look in c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc
> >>> And edit out anything that looks suspicious.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> My hosts file has nearly 5000 lines, each starting with 127.0.0.1 -
> >> but nothing poiting at my POP server.
> >>
> >
> > WHAT!!!
> >
> > you dont need it anyway!
> >
>
> Indeed - I've already renamed the file - but haven't yet re-booted so it
> will still be using the old version. I'll see whether anything changes after
> a re-boot - but I'm not optimistic!
Should not need a restart - hosts file gets read *every* time on all
OSs I have ever worked with. I presume the 5000 odd lines are to stop
page resolving to ad sites.
There is a way to reset TCP and friends to a fresh install state
without actually doing it. It is a command line incantation which
escapes me at the moment but google should turn it up.
--
Regards
Dave Saville
Kráftéé
news:fV45K0OBJxbE-p...@bearpaw.bear.den...
You're not thinking of Ipconfig are you?
Spamtastic Spastic
shat out:
And your Mailwasher is definitely using port 110? You've looked at the
packets leaving the PC with something like Wireshark?
Forgetting all the odd bumfoolery going on with IE, you need to sniff the
NIC and see what is really happening.
Dave Saville
wrote:
No. I meant, quick google, "netsh int ip reset resetlog.txt"
--
Regards
Dave Saville
Roger Mills
Spamtastic Spastic <nu...@null.org> wrote:
>
> And your Mailwasher is definitely using port 110?
Yes.
>You've looked at the
> packets leaving the PC with something like Wireshark?
>
Not yet.
> Forgetting all the odd bumfoolery going on with IE, you need to sniff
> the NIC and see what is really happening.
I'm sure you're right! I'm going to be tied up for a few days now, but will
have a go in a week or so unless anyone has produced a magic bullet by then.
The Natural Philosopher
> Ignore me - I've lost the plot.
>
>
>
No worries. I usually do ;-)
Spamtastic Spastic
shat out:
> In an earlier contribution to this discussion, Spamtastic Spastic
> <nu...@null.org> wrote:
>
>
>> And your Mailwasher is definitely using port 110?
>
> Yes.
>
>>You've looked at the
>> packets leaving the PC with something like Wireshark?
>>
> Not yet.
>
>> Forgetting all the odd bumfoolery going on with IE, you need to sniff
>> the NIC and see what is really happening.
>
> I'm sure you're right! I'm going to be tied up for a few days now, but
> will have a go in a week or so unless anyone has produced a magic bullet
> by then.
Here is the magic bullet you require:
Look at what is actually happening with Wireshark.
There you go. Job done.
Spamtastic Spastic
spaghetti and shat out:
> Spamtastic Spastic wrote:
>
>> Ignore me - I've lost the plot.
>>
>>
>>
> No worries. I usually do ;-)
But you can't resist saying so? Bless..... go and put that dunces hat on
**AGAIN**