Do I have uninvited Guests?
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 47

Thread: Do I have uninvited Guests?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 1999
    Location
    Underwood, Iowa, United States
    Posts
    736

    Do I have uninvited Guests?

    My home network is a little more complicated than most. My ISP is fibre optic, so no modem.

    My ISP goes to my "Main" router, it is set up as the "Host" with an IP 192.168.2.1. It is set as the Gateway DHCP Server.

    It has a second router connected by ethernet in another part of the house. Simply named Bob, IP 192.168.2.4

    A third router in the shop also connected by ethernet named Shop Router, IP 192.168.2.17


    So my network has always seemed slower than it should be. But it has worked in this setup for several years. And I have WIFI throught the house and shop. I recently did some testing on my network and ran a network test "Netscan"


    I set Netscan to start at IP 192.168.1.1 and run through 192.168.2.200

    Netscan shows 16 devices on my network. With the first 3 in the IP range 192.168.1.1, 192.168.1.120 and 192.168.1.184 The others are in the 192.168.2.1** range

    So my question, is my network working "right" with these three connected in the .1. range? I thought I had my network set up so that everything had to be in the .2.*** range.

    Netscan only shows the IP's of these items, no MAC or names for them.


    I hope it is OK to have posted my IP's if not please delete.
    This thing has more bugs than a big city flop house.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Sheboygan, WI
    Posts
    53,044
    Those are all Private IPs so no problem with that part.

    If I found the right tutorial, you can set it to Resolve MAC addresses
    https://www.softperfect.com/products...canner/manual/

    192.168.1.1, 192.168.1.120 and 192.168.1.184
    Wonder if you picked up someones wireless router ?????
    SMILE
    and post back. Let us know if it worked.
    [ Book mark this post to find it again]

    AntiX-16, MX-16 and Win 10

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 1999
    Location
    Underwood, Iowa, United States
    Posts
    736
    Quote Originally Posted by Train View Post
    Those are all Private IPs so no problem with that part.

    If I found the right tutorial, you can set it to Resolve MAC addresses
    https://www.softperfect.com/products...canner/manual/


    Wonder if you picked up someones wireless router ?????
    Thanks Train. I set that option and reran the scan. The three in the .1. set still came up. The resolve showed little more info. It shows the IP address and the Host name. It shows the Host name for these three as the same as their IP.

    Might be a neighbors router.
    This thing has more bugs than a big city flop house.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Sheboygan, WI
    Posts
    53,044
    This thing has more bugs than a big city flop house.
    LOL, that may well be.
    Now, WifiInfoView , I have on this laptop.
    http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/wifi_information_view.html

    I travel a lot and it gives me information that has come in handy many a time. Like SSID , MAC addresses, signal strenth [RSSI], etc.
    SMILE
    and post back. Let us know if it worked.
    [ Book mark this post to find it again]

    AntiX-16, MX-16 and Win 10

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Sheboygan, WI
    Posts
    53,044
    In the RSSI column, if the signal is less than a -70, that is a -70dB, I can connect to it.

    A -90 with the onboard nic, means I need to use my external nic as it has a external antenna which picks up more signal and probably has a -60 reading , that I can connect to.
    SMILE
    and post back. Let us know if it worked.
    [ Book mark this post to find it again]

    AntiX-16, MX-16 and Win 10

  6. #6
    HAN's Avatar
    HAN is offline Virtual PC Specialist!!!
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,314
    Ron, anymore news on this issue?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 1999
    Location
    Underwood, Iowa, United States
    Posts
    736
    Unfortunately no.

    I have ran the tools suggested and am unable to find any more information than I knew to begin with. I ran a scan just before this reply and still show several IP's in the 192.168.1.*** range on my network.
    This thing has more bugs than a big city flop house.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Sheboygan, WI
    Posts
    53,044
    The 2 tools should have listed the SSID and MAC addresses, After matching them, I would block the Mac addresses.
    SMILE
    and post back. Let us know if it worked.
    [ Book mark this post to find it again]

    AntiX-16, MX-16 and Win 10

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 1999
    Location
    Underwood, Iowa, United States
    Posts
    736
    Here are shots of what the tools show

    Capture2.PNGCapture.PNG

    The first WIFI in Wininfo list with no SSID is my Roku. It shows the name if I scroll over in the Wininfo view.
    This thing has more bugs than a big city flop house.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Arkham Asylum, Cell 13
    Posts
    10,053
    If the first one is a Roku, then it's possible the other devices are things like Smart TVs.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Idaho Falls, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    14,789
    The second entry in the WiFiInfo list appears to be an HP printer. Do you have one of those with wireless capability?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Sheboygan, WI
    Posts
    53,044
    I dragged my columns to where I wanted them.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    SMILE
    and post back. Let us know if it worked.
    [ Book mark this post to find it again]

    AntiX-16, MX-16 and Win 10

  13. #13
    HAN's Avatar
    HAN is offline Virtual PC Specialist!!!
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,314
    If I were in your shoes, I'd have to figure this out. If network tools can't help, I be down to disconnecting everything off the network and reconnect stuff back one at a time. Then rerun your scan after each new device. Even though you apparently have several things connected, 3 things in the 192.168.1.x range should start showing up pretty quickly I'd think.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 1999
    Location
    Underwood, Iowa, United States
    Posts
    736
    Yes this is frustrating. Part of my frustration is my lack of complete understanding of how a network actually works.

    My understanding is that my network is coming into my home from my ISP into my router (gateway)(192.168.2.1) that is set to be my IP server. It is set as a DHCP Server starting with IP's at 192.168.2.100.

    So the way I understand it everything on my network "should" have an IP in the range of 192.168.2.1**. I have several networked items that are ethernet connected (routers, computers, home server) that are in the 192.168.2.1----192.168.2.1**

    So the items in the 192.168.1.*** surely do not seem to me that they should belong on my network, yet the consistently show up in my network scans.
    This thing has more bugs than a big city flop house.

  15. #15
    HAN's Avatar
    HAN is offline Virtual PC Specialist!!!
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,314
    Without knowing all the specifics, I would hook up the internet to the main, 1st router, connect your PC to that router and then test. Everything else MUST be disconnected. Nothing else can be on the LAN. If that tests well (no 192.168.1.x addresses), add the 2nd router. Test again. And so forth. Adding one router at a time. If all the routers and your PC are testing ok, then start adding devices, one at a time, testing each one as you go.

    I'm guessing that there may be some devices that have static IP addresses (manually forced to be in the 192.168.1.x range.) But that's a guess at this point.

    Is that slow and a pain in the neck? Yep! But I know of no other way to proceed if your testing tools can't lay things out any better.

    I have never ran 2 IP address ranges on the same network at one time but I have read it can exist. I would imagine that it has to cause interference and speed issues.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •