# Receiver keeps losing ability to see DVRs



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

I have a new setup, 2 DVRs and 3 Receivers. One of my receivers keeps losing the ability to see the DVRs. A network check indicates that it is connected to the network. A reboot restores its ability to see the DVRs.

Is this a faulty receiver?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

check out this thread for some info:

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=185713


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Well, I thought that could be it, but when looking at my router, I can see that all 5 of the receivers are still active on the network.

They show up in the IP address log, and their leases have all been renewed within the past day.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

coit said:


> Well, I thought that could be it, but when looking at my router, I can see that all 5 of the receivers are still active on the network.
> 
> They show up in the IP address log, and their leases have all been renewed within the past day.


That's where the problem seems to be. When the lease is renewed, the router believes the receivers are there, the receiver believe they have a correct IP address, but there is some disconnect so that in reality the lease was not renewed correctly. Give static IP addressing a try and see if that resolves your issue.

- Merg


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> Well, I thought that could be it, but when looking at my router, I can see that all 5 of the receivers are still active on the network.
> 
> They show up in the IP address log, and their leases have all been renewed within the past day.


Yes, "but" from experience there seems to be part of MRV that seems to not be renewed.
I'm not a router expert [by any means] but have done some testing and seen both "no problem" and "the problem", and in the case of "the problem" static IPs outside of the DHCP pool resolved it.

If you want to play around a bit: remove the bridge to your router, reboot all the receivers and let them configure without the router assigning IPs. Test how MRV works this way.
"Most" find MRV works fine and this only happens when the router comes back into the loop.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

OK, that did not fix my issue. All receivers are on static IPs, outside the DHCP range. Same receiver again tonight would not see the DVRs.

Any other suggestions? I have the tech's phone number, I guess I just need to have him swap out the receiver, eh?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> OK, that did not fix my issue. All receivers are on static IPs, outside the DHCP range. Same receiver again tonight would not see the DVRs.
> 
> Any other suggestions? I have the tech's phone number, I guess I just need to have him swap out the receiver, eh?


Before you have him do that, move them off the router & internet by disconnecting the BB DECA, and reboot all the receivers.
Check if they play well without the router. If they don't, then maybe get a receiver/DECA swapped.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

One more thing to try... Swap the receiver with another location and see if the issue moves with the receiver or stays at the location. If the receiver has a DECA attached, leave it where it is at first and if the issue doesn't move, then swap the DECA with another and see if the issue moves with the DECA.

- Merg


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Actually, I think my router may have been hosed up.

After I made the changes, I was fairly certain that it rebooted itself, but apparently maybe it didn't. I power cycled it, and the receiver has been good so far.

Something was hosed, because it was even effecting my speeds on the internet... 

So, I'm keeping my fingers crossed!


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Well, I continue to have problems with my installation. It doesn't happen enough to be more than annoying, and frustrating now.

I swapped locations on the one receiver that was first exhibiting problems, and it never lost the ability to see the DVRs in the new locations, but it did freeze solid trying to play back a program, such that I had to pull the power cable to reboot.

And now, a second receiver is losing the ability to see the receivers.

Keep in mind that all 5 of my receivers are on static IPs, outside of the range that DHCP is using, and no other devices in my house have the same IP as the receivers.

Also, I find playback controls on any other receiver other than the DVR that recorded the program to be very sluggish. The 30 second skips take a long time, and it is hard to stop in the right spot using the 4x FF. Is this typical, or indicative of a larger problem?

I guess I just need to call the tech to come back and diagnose it, but I just don't have 4 hour windows to wait around for what I anticipate to be a multiple visit issue. Is this something I could fix myself? Plus, how can I get the problem to replicate while he is there? 

Very frustrating.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

If there is a question about the DECA network status and you have any 24s, you can run a test of the coax network. Press guide & > buttons on the front panel to find the menu.

Do you have a lot of wireless devices on your network?

At least one member needed to use an old router between the DECA network and his home network/router. He has the same 2Wire I do, but had problems I don't [but I also don't have much wireless activity either].

FF has auto correcting that makes 4xFF require six 30 sec skips to get to where you stopped it.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

I don't have any 24s. Anybody wanna give me one? :lol:

My DECA is connected to my home network via a switch, which is in turn connected to my Wireless Router via ethernet. I have a LOT of wireless traffic in the house, but I would think the switch would isolate my TV network from the rest, if that's what you mean.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> I don't have any 24s. Anybody wanna give me one? :lol:
> 
> My DECA is connected to my home network via a switch, which is in turn connected to my Wireless Router via ethernet. I have a LOT of wireless traffic in the house, but I would think the switch would isolate my TV network from the rest, if that's what you mean.


"For some reason", routers with lots of wireless devices don't always behave as well as those without. I have no idea why, but that last time this came up, the "solution" was a $10 old router between the two.
Normally static IPs resolve this, but not always.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Well, like I said, I am using a switch, which as far as I know is exactly the same as a router but without the WAN connectivity or the wireless, so it sounds like that wouldn't change anything.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> Well,* like I said*, I am using a switch, which as far as I know is exactly the same as a router but without the WAN connectivity or the wireless, so it sounds like that wouldn't change anything.


I read that, but no it isn't the same. By using a second router, it is the one handling the receiver side of the network, while the primary is handling the wireless aspect.
Frankly I'm only telling you what has worked for someone else having the same problems.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Well, now I can't get my installer to call me back. Spoke to him briefly 2 days ago, and he said he would get right back with me with a time.

So much for the big tip I gave him...


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> Well, now I can't get my installer to call me back. Spoke to him briefly 2 days ago, and he said he would get right back with me with a time.
> 
> So much for the big tip I gave him...


He may be trying to get some information about your problem, but isn't finding any.
Their training ends with connecting the BB DECA to your router, and it doesn't go any further into your home network.
I've posted what we've seen here and what some have done. This goes way beyond what an installer has been given.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Maybe I'm not stating the problem clearly, but this has nothing to do with my network. One of my receivers keeps losing the DVRs. Rebooting the receiver fixes the problem, temporarily.

So the guy finally comes out, and says, yep, that receiver isn't communicating with the network. So he says the solution is to reboot my main receiver, the one the DECA is connected to? And to powercycle the stuff that the switch is connected to?

He assured me that this would fix the problem. I find a very hard time believing that, since I was only having problems with one receiver.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> Maybe I'm not stating the problem clearly, but this has nothing to do with my network. One of my receivers keeps losing the DVRs. Rebooting the receiver fixes the problem, temporarily.
> 
> So the guy finally comes out, and says, yep, that receiver isn't communicating with the network. So he says the solution is to reboot my main receiver, the one the DECA is connected to? And to powercycle the stuff that the switch is connected to?
> 
> He assured me that this would fix the problem. I find a very hard time believing that, since I was only having problems with one receiver.


"Well" to prove that this has NOTHING to do with your home network: 
Remove the BB DECA connection, and then reboot all the receivers. Rebooting should have each sift to their internal IP address.
Run the system this way and see if the problem shows back up.
"If so", then it isn't your home network.
"If not" and the problem doesn't repeat, then what you're having is related to your router.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Rebooting should have each sift to their internal IP address.


What is the internal IP address, and where can you see it? Remember I have set all my IP addresses statically.



veryoldschool said:


> "If not" and the problem doesn't repeat, then what you're having is related to your router.


Or, the way the receiver handles static IP addresses.

If I were having this problem with all my receivers, I would believe it could be related to the network. But, since it is only this one receiver, then I have a hard time believing that it could be anything else but a faulty receiver. And I don't exactly have time to try to track down this installer multiple times when he should've just replaced the receiver first.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> What is the internal IP address, and where can you see it? Remember I have set all my IP addresses statically.


 Under auto they'll be 169.xxx.xxx.xxx



> Or, the way the receiver handles static IP addresses.
> 
> If I were having this problem with all my receivers, I would believe it could be related to the network. But, since it is only this one receiver, then I have a hard time believing that it could be anything else but a faulty receiver. And I don't exactly have time to try to track down this installer multiple times when he should've just replaced the receiver first.


You seem to be fixed on what the problem is, or what you think it is.
I can only offer help from those that had a similar problem.
If you don't think this is yours, or don't want to try a few things to prove it or isolate that it's not, there isn't much more I can do.
"Good Luck" 

As you can see, only Merg & I are replying in this thread too.


----------



## rayxxxle (Mar 28, 2007)

VOS,
I know very little about all of this except what you and Merg have taught me through my installation, but reading the quote below taken out of one of the OP's posts, could it be that the BB DECA is connected directly to one of his receivers and causing the problem. Or am I completely off base?
Just still learning.

Quote:
So the guy finally comes out, and says, yep, that receiver isn't communicating with the network. So he says the solution is to reboot my main receiver, the one the DECA is connected to? And to powercycle the stuff that the switch is connected to


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

rayxxxle said:


> VOS,
> I know very little about all of this except what you and Merg have taught me through my installation, but reading the quote below taken out of one of the OP's posts, could it be that the BB DECA is connected directly to one of his receivers and causing the problem. Or am I completely off base?
> Just still learning.
> 
> ...


No, you're not "off base". We've seen a DECA be bad.
To check if this might be the problem, removing the BB DECA connection is what I'd do.
Reducing the system to its simplest components is how troubleshooting is done.
If the system won't work "stand alone", then it's DirecTV's job/problem to fix it.
If it turns out to be stable without the internet connection, then there isn't much an installer is doing to do, and like we've seen many times before [and more so with active wireless networks], there is something going on [or not going on] in the router.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I have to agree. That's troubleshooting 101.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Well, the bad receiver had already lost its connection about 3 hours after the guy left, with no operation of it at all.

The rest of the receivers are fine, and have been fine. He is supposedly going to bring a replacement out tomorrow. After that is in, and if I have problems, then I'll look at isolating the system from my home network and see what happens.

However, since they sold me (and charged me for) a Cinema connection, I will most certainly hold them to making it work. 


As for me fixating on the problem. Yeah, since it is only one receiver, then I am pretty much fixated on that. If all three were having problems, I might give your theory more weight.

Also, could you please link me to the thread where this is all being discussed. All I can find is the FAQ that's stickied, where it is said that discussion is going on in the discussion thread, which I cannot find even by searching for the title of the FAQ thread less the "FAQ" and it seems the discussion in the FAQ thread is pretty minimal.

Thanks for everyone's thoughts on the issue!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> Well, the bad receiver had already lost its connection about 3 hours after the guy left, with no operation of it at all.
> 
> The rest of the receivers are fine, and have been fine. He is supposedly going to bring a replacement out tomorrow. After that is in, and if I have problems, then I'll look at isolating the system from my home network and see what happens.
> 
> ...


At this point, you seem to be fixed in not wanting to follow any of the help that's been offered and since I'm merely a volunteer here trying to help, I have no further desire to find links for you or for that matter waste more of my time.

If you at some point want help, please PM me and I'll remove this thread from my ignore list.

Good luck and I do hope you find the resolution you're looking for.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

LOL, well I did follow the suggestions in the FAQ regarding static IPs. 

And the only other direction you gave me was to hook another router into my system. When I tried to explain that I already had a switch isolating my DVR network from my home network, it didn't seem like you understood that a router IS a switch with the WAN side connectivity and other firewall type rules added in.

So, if anyone else cares to point me to the other thread, which I doubt even exists, it would be appreciated.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> And the only other direction you gave me was...
> 
> So, if anyone else cares to point me to the other thread, which *I doubt even exists,* it would be appreciated.


Read post #19

The bold part expresses an attitude that makes it hard to help someone who's asked for help.

Back to the ignore list.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> The bold part expresses an *attitude *that makes it hard to help someone who's asked for help.
> 
> *Back to the ignore list*.


Perhaps you should check your own attidude before you start criticizing mine?

You've been ignoring what I said pretty much the whole time, so being on your ignore list won't be any different.

The receiver has a defect. I know it, and the installer also knows it.

But hopefully putting my receivers on static IPs will hopefully save me from future headaches, so thanks for that.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Search for "Multiple-Room Viewing and Static IP Addresses - Discussion".

- Merg

Sent from my iPod touch using DBSTalk


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Fantastic, finally found it, thanks!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> Perhaps you should check your own attidude before you start criticizing mine?


I will admit you've been a bit frustrating as I've tried to have you find out what/where your problem lies.
Instead of berating other members, it's best to simply ignore them, so since I can't help you, or you don't find my suggestions helpful, ignoring is my last option.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Well, the tech came back again this morning, and apparently did an hour's worth of something, and concluded that there is nothing wrong.

Of course, the one receiver couldn't see the DVRs when he got there, and hadn't been able to since about 2 hours after he left yesterday, but I guess that doesn't count as being something wrong. He told my wife he could not replace the receiver without charging us (?), but he was going to work with his supervisor to see what they could do.

So, I've documented everything in an e-mail to DTV, hopefully that will get the ball rolling, since dealing with techs is always a losing proposition. I have never had a good experience with the group that supports DTV in my area.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Disconnect the damn BB DECA and reboot everything to their internal IP addresses.
If you still have problems, then this is just more proof to have them replace "something".
If it doesn't change anything, then it isn't on the DirecTV side of things.

I don't know why you're so stubborn. :nono:


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

I thought you were ignoring this thread? 

I'm documenting my experience here in case someone else is in the same boat. VOS, don't feel like you have to respond to me, since you clearly don't like my attitude.

After spending over $400 on new equipment and installation, I expect DTV to make it work. I don't expect to be the one experimenting. I am the customer, and they should have no problem replacing a single receiver that isn't working right. If all of them were not working, then I could see that it might be something on my network.

But, the fact that one receiver doesn't work correctly makes it very highly likely that this receiver has a problem. Not sure how anyone could blame the wireless networking equipment for only affecting one receiver...


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> I thought you were ignoring this thread?


I guess I should go back to that, instead of trying to give you help to "prove your point" and get better results from DirecTV.
I don't know that you don't have a bad receiver. 
I do know that you haven't bothered to look into something that an installer won't be able to troubleshoot for you, as this takes hours to test/isolate.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I do know that you haven't bothered to look into something that an installer won't be able to troubleshoot for you, as *this takes hours to test/isolate.*


BINGO!

And before I do something that takes hours, I want the more logical thing to be done, which is to swap out the receiver. All signs indicate to it being a faulty receiver. I paid good money for this equipment, and it is reasonable for me to expect it to work, and even more reasonable to expect something that is suspect to be swapped out.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> BINGO!
> 
> And before I do something that takes hours, I want the more logical thing to be done, which is to swap out the receiver. All signs indicate to it being a faulty receiver. I paid good money for this equipment, and it is reasonable for me to expect it to work, and even more reasonable to expect something that is suspect to be swapped out.


I'm not faulting your "expectations", but "realistically" I think you'll need to narrow thing down to it a bit before you're going to get any results.
You've already had the tech back out and he's told you what he will/won't do.
You can keep going the way you are, or change your tact and move towards getting this resolved.
I will say, that if you do get a receiver swapped and it continues, I'll be laughing my ass off.
You could have a network/router problem as there have been many threads/post in this forum about this, or you could have some defective hardware, be it the receiver, software, or the DECA connected to it.

I guess I'm more into actually fixing something than trying to prove some "hunch" as to what is wrong and what someone else should do, but hell that's just me. I troubleshoot things to find out what is the problem and then "nail" whoever is supposed to fix it.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I'm not faulting your "expectations", but "realistically" I think you'll need to narrow thing down to it a bit before you're going to get any results.


Why should *I* be the one narrowing things down. I paid for a service to be installed. I expect the service to work. If my router stopped connecting to the internet in the first day or two that I bought it, I would return it to the store and get another one. I would not spend hours and hours assuming that something on my network was causing the problem.

If I bought a new car, and for some reason, it started stalling in the middle of the road, I would take it back and expect them to fix it, replacing whatever part was causing the problem. I wouldn't be tinkering with it myself, trying to figure out what the problem was. That's the companies job, not the customer.



veryoldschool said:


> You could have a network/router problem as there have been many threads/post in this forum about this, or you could have some defective hardware, be it the receiver, software, or the DECA connected to it.


I read the WHOLE thread of 12 pages, and only one person had a problem that was narrowed down to a router. Everyone else fixed their problem by using Static IP, which I am already using. And the person that fixed their problem with a spare router may have been able to do it by using Static IPs as well, they just went in a different direction.



veryoldschool said:


> I guess I'm more into actually fixing something than trying to prove some "hunch" as to what is wrong and what someone else should do, but hell that's just me. I troubleshoot things to find out what is the problem and then "nail" whoever is supposed to fix it.


Hey, I like to tinker with stuff too, just ask my wife! And I've been around here since 2002, I just changed my handle a few years ago. And I with was DISH before that, and used the bug-ridden DISHPlayer, so I know all about working with quirky equipment.

However, given that I paid $400+ for this equipment and professional installation, I expect it to WORK flawlessly. And if it doesn't, I'm going to have them come and get it.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

There are over 50 pages of threads here, so I doubt you've read everything. IIRC the one who used a second router had tried static IPs before and it didn't help.
As for the "hours & hours", you're being overly dramatic. 15-30 mins to make a change and watch/wait to see what happens. Since you'd be normally watching TV, the wait time shouldn't impact you one bit.
If dropping your home network connection didn't change anything, then another 15-30 mins, and you're getting closer to finding what the problem is, as I would be changing out the DECA with another to see if it was the cause.
At this point I might have 30-60 mins "of work", and if it still wasn't working correctly, I'd use this to have DirecTV swap out the receiver at no charge.
If on the other hand the first step did work, then it could be something as simply as rebooting the router. At least one member went through this and found they needed to do a factory reset of their router, which fixed it.
There are simply too many parts in the system right now to know which is the cause and while you might be able to get someone to do the 15-30 min steps, they're sure as hell aren't going to babysit the system waiting for it to fail or not.

At this point most of my posting isn't as much for you, as it is for others that may read this thread looking for help for their problems.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> I have a new setup, 2 DVRs and 3 Receivers. One of my receivers keeps losing the ability to see the DVRs. A network check indicates that it is connected to the network. A reboot restores its ability to see the DVRs.
> 
> *Is this a faulty receiver*?


I guess you haven't been looking for help, but also haven't found anyone to agree with you either in the past 3 weeks.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I guess you haven't been looking for help, but also haven't found anyone to agree with you either in the past 3 weeks.


The guy in the president's office did. 

After I change out the ONE receiver that's been giving me problems, I don't expect to have any more problems with my setup.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Oh, and just because no one here knows if a receiver is faulty doesn't mean they don't agree with me. 

The way I see it, you are the only one that disagrees with me.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> The way I see it, you are the only one that disagrees with me.


I never disagreed, but then you never proved it either, so why would I?


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

veryoldschool said:


> ...Disconnect the damn BB DECA and reboot everything to their internal IP addresses....


I know I'm way late to this party, but this is exactly what will narrow down the issue. If you can run like this for a day or two it will verify the receiver and DECA LAN functionality. Obviously, you'll lose internet connectivity, but it will show you definitively whether the receiver is defective. If the above doesn't work you'll have concrete evidence to provide the tech and get the receiver swapped.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

"Reboot everything to their internal IPs" means to reset each H/HR to default networking (Restore Defaults in the Network Setup menu).

After they reboot with no DHCP server available, they'll assign themselves a 169.254.x.x address. Run this isolated network a few days and see if the receiver still burps.


----------



## DrummerBoy523 (Jan 9, 2007)

coit said:


> Oh, and just because no one here knows if a receiver is faulty doesn't mean they don't agree with me.
> 
> The way I see it, you are the only one that disagrees with me.


I've been reading this thread and frankly I cannot for the life of me figure out why you started it? VOS came by to help and you acted like you didn't need help - but yet you complained that no one was helping you. He gave you detailed troubleshooting steps for you to figure this out but you didn't want to do that. So, why again did you post this thread?


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

DrummerBoy523 said:


> I've been reading this thread and frankly I cannot for the life of me figure out why you started it? VOS came by to help and you acted like you didn't need help - but yet you complained that no one was helping you. He gave you detailed troubleshooting steps for you to figure this out but you didn't want to do that. So, why again did you post this thread?


I think if you read the first 10 posts, you can pretty clearly see the progression of things.

Post #1 - I didn't have a clue what was going on.
Post #2 - VOS points me to the DHCP issue FAQ.

Posts #4-10, I implement the suggestions about setting IPs as static, works for awhile, then stops as before. VOS suggests I disconnect the DTV professionally installed equipment and do testing to see if it still has the problem when I operate without the functionality I paid for.

Also during that time, I moved the faulty receiver to a new location, to see if cabling were perhaps the problem. During that time, the faulty receiver continued to be faulty, and the good receiver continued to be good.

I guess the fact that I'm the only person here who has had a faulty receiver is a good thing. Means that DTV is building a good product.

But really guys, I haven't been making personal attacks against any of you, and yet multiple people who have made no material contributions to the thread feel like they have to take shots at me? VOS clearly likes to do a little ribbing. I'm sure it is good natured, and I have taken it as such, and given him a little in return. I never started it, and I never complained about him giving it.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> Also during that time, I moved the faulty receiver to a new location, to see if cabling were perhaps the problem. During that time, the faulty receiver continued to be faulty, and the good receiver continued to be good.


Which was a complete waste of your time, as you found out, and not suggested by me either.
Had you taken this time to do what was suggested, you would have found out if your receiver was the problem or not.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Had you taken this time to do what was suggested, you would have found out if your receiver was the problem or not.


You want to wager on whether I'm right or not?

But you made my point exactly. I am not going to take the time to pull the receiver out of my shelf, disconnect some cables that I'm not fully clear on which one to pull and not pull, etc, then set all 5 receivers back to dynamic IP mode then reboot them, only to have to set it all back the other way.

And, if your suggestion were to work, well that won't do me any good because I won't be connected to the internet. Still have to hook everything back up.

Please, tell me how ONE receiver could have a problem with my setup while the other 4 do not. Then I'll tell you that the receiver STILL has a problem. And, while you are at it, explain technically why one receiver could have a problem in my setup, but not the other 4. If you feel like doing something other than criticize me that is....


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> You want to wager on whether I'm right or not?
> 
> But you made my point exactly. I am not going to take the time to pull the receiver out of my shelf, disconnect some cables that I'm not fully clear on which one to pull and not pull, etc, then set all 5 receivers back to dynamic IP mode then reboot them, only to have to set it all back the other way.
> 
> ...


This is just so pointless.

"Disabling" your internet was to only narrow down and confirm what the problem was.
"Instead" you've spend god knows how much time refusing & trying to justify "your opinion" of what's wrong, along with wasting god knows how much of other people's time, "when" a few mins would have given you what is really wrong.
This has got to be the dumbest approach to finding a problem that has been posted here.


----------



## DrummerBoy523 (Jan 9, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> This is just so pointless.
> 
> "Disabling" your internet was to only narrow down and confirm what the problem was.
> "Instead" you've spend god knows how much time refusing & trying to justify "your opinion" of what's wrong, along with wasting god knows how much of other people's time, "when" a few mins would have given you what is really wrong.
> This has got to be the dumbest approach to finding a problem that has been posted here.


agreed and I'm wondering why you have wasted any more of your time on this - it is clear to me that the OP knows exactly what the problem is (which still begs my question why he posted for help in the first place??).


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

DrummerBoy523 said:


> agreed and I'm wondering why you have wasted any more of your time on this - it is clear to me that the OP knows exactly what the problem is (which still begs my question why he posted for help in the first place??).


I very clearly responded to you. Did you overlook my response? It is about 3-4 posts above this one. May I recommend that if you don't have anything constructive to add, that you just move along?


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> "Disabling" your internet was to only narrow down and confirm what the problem was.
> "Instead" you've spend god knows how much time refusing & trying to justify "your opinion" of what's wrong, along with wasting god knows how much of other people's time, "when" a few mins would have given you what is really wrong.
> This has got to be the dumbest approach to finding a problem that has been posted here.


I just got off the phone with a DTV Engineer. After I described to him what I did, he said that I did everything that he would have done, including swapping the receiver locations to see if the trouble followed the box or stayed at the location.

He gave me a key sequence to type into the keyword search box that would tell the box to send a diagnostic report back to DTV. It would not work because the receiver was off of the network. He had me try changing the IP address and also restoring to default to try to get the box back on the network without having to reboot it and lose the report logs in the process. Unfortunately, none of these would work to enable the report to be sent. He is looking forward to getting this box in and taking a look at it.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> May I recommend that if you don't have anything constructive to add, that you just move along?


Be careful as that may fit most of your posts here too.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Be careful as that may fit most of your posts here too.


Let's make the bet VOS. Otherwise, may I suggest you put me on your ignore list?

Oh, and be sure to read my post right above yours....


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> Oh, and be sure to read my post right above yours....


I read it in the other thread.
I guess you're not an edgecutter either. 
Thinking something is wrong/bad and taking the few steps to know something is, makes so much difference, but hey you didn't start this thread for that, but merely wanted someone to agree with you with no apparent reason/testing to support it.

"Oh and" when was the first time you mentioned this receiver "lost the internet connection"?

It's taken about a month for you to start give "us" the information, like what hardware and what "all" the issues are.

Betting with someone that isn't showing all their cards isn't something I do. :nono:


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> but hey you didn't start this thread for that, but merely wanted someone to agree with you with no apparent reason/testing to support it.


The whole "putting words in my mouth", so to speak, is getting a little old.

Since it seems that you might be suffering from some memory loss, let me refresh it for you.

1. I had a problem and didn't know what it was.
2. You very kindly pointed me to a FAQ that talked about others having a similar problem.
3. I incorporated the change recommended in that FAQ, which was to set all boxes to static IPs outside the range of my routers DHCP pool. 
4. My problem persisted, leading me to try other common troubleshooting methods, concluding that I had a faulty receiver.

The rest has been you saying you were going to ignore this thread, yet continuing to whine that I wasn't following your advice.

The bottom line is that everyone in the FAQ and associated discussion thread was able to solve their problem by setting IPs to static. One person added a second router in their configuration, but admitted that they possibly could have solved their problem with static IPs, but had not tried it since they already had the other router laying around.

And as for being in the cutting edge or whatever you were referring to, while I honestly couldn't care less. I come hear when I have problems, not to be a part of some DTV club. What DTV does with you guys is great, but I have better things to do with my time.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

See my edit above.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> See my edit above.


Yeah, I see where you are so quick to tell me I'm wrong, but aren't willing to make a friendly wager.

This will be the last time I respond to anything you write, so you can feel free to continue to pick away at me. You seem to enjoy it.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> Yeah, I see where you are so quick to tell me I'm wrong, but aren't willing to make a friendly wager.
> 
> This will be the last time I respond to anything you write, so you can feel free to continue to pick away at me. You seem to enjoy it.





> *One of my receivers keeps losing the ability to see the DVRs. A network check indicates that it is connected to the network*. A reboot restores its ability to see the DVRs.


From your first post.

It would sure help to be give ALL the facts. Back peddling isn't going to cut it.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

The Merg said:


> One more thing to try... Swap the receiver with another location and see if the issue moves with the receiver or stays at the location. If the receiver has a DECA attached, leave it where it is at first and if the issue doesn't move, then swap the DECA with another and see if the issue moves with the DECA.
> 
> - Merg


And as everyone seems to think this is a bad idea, I guess I'll just post this here as evidence that I'm not the only one who thought this was a good idea.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

coit said:


> And as everyone seems to think this is a bad idea, I guess I'll just post this here as evidence that I'm not the only one who thought this was a good idea.


Only to those that don't understand DECA & RF.


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

To the OP: It's certainly possible you have a bad receiver, but it's also possible there's a "different" problem. This "different" problem is something D* is looking into (and I believe VOS alluded to earlier.) That's about the extent of the details I can provide. 

A quick test is to unplug the BB DECA from your router, reboot the receivers, and try MRV on the "problem" box for at least a day. It may not make logical sense, but I promise that it's a worthwile excercise in your case.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dsw2112 said:


> To the OP: It's certainly possible you have a bad receiver, but it's also possible there's a "different" problem. This "different" problem is something D* is looking into (and I believe VOS alluded to earlier.) That's about the extent of the details I can provide.
> 
> A quick test is to unplug the BB DECA from your router, reboot the receivers, and try MRV on the "problem" box for at least a day. It may not make logical sense, but I promise that it's a worthwile excercise in your case.


If it's really losing the internet as eluded to just a bit ago, then this suggests either the DECA or the receiver more than what Coit first posted about MRV.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

I've got 10 coins in my pocket.
I'll show you two and now you must tell me how much the total of all of them are. You must bet with me too. :lol: :nono:


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

dsw2112 said:


> To the OP: It's certainly possible you have a bad receiver, but it's also possible there's a "different" problem. This "different" problem is something D* is looking into (and I believe VOS alluded to earlier.) That's about the extent of the details I can provide.
> 
> A quick test is to unplug the BB DECA from your router, reboot the receivers, and try MRV on the "problem" box for at least a day. It may not make logical sense, but I promise that it's a worthwile excercise in your case.


Well, it must be something like that, because the engineer called me back and said that if the new receiver didn't fix the problem, he would like to come out and see the setup first hand to do testing.

Based on all the focus you guys have had on the DECA, I was surprised that he didn't ask me to do the same things you guys are asking. Well, maybe I wasn't that surprised... :lol:

Since I'm down here, I considered pulling the plug and rebooting, but we've got The Bachelor recording, and I don't want to incur the wrath of the women folk in my house if you know what I mean. Plus, it is more than just rebooting, as I have to reset each receiver to the default setting, which involves about 10-15 minutes each and my receivers are on 3 different floors. You know how long it takes for these things to boot, then it takes a few minutes to go through the network setup, and naming the receiver, etc. And of course I would have to go back through all of that again to put them back on the internet.


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

veryoldschool said:


> If it's really losing the internet as eluded to just a bit ago, then this suggests either the DECA or the receiver more than what Coit first posted about MRV.


Yeah, there seems to be some conflicting info. In any case isolating to the DECA network will provide some very useful connectivity info and rule several things in/out pretty quick.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dsw2112 said:


> Yeah, there seems to be some conflicting info.* In any case isolating to the DECA network will provide some very useful connectivity info and rule several things in/out pretty quick*.


yep, and why this was asked of him first.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

I still think it's not installed properly. It's hard to tell with all your backtracking and different explanations you've given. Plus, you keep posting in 2 topics.


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

coit said:


> ...And of course I would have to go back through all of that again to put them back on the internet...


Just remember if you try that approach to leave the BB DECA disconnected for at least 24 hours. You'll also need to MRV with the "problem" receiver during this timeframe.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> I still think it's not installed properly. It's hard to tell with all your backtracking and different explanations you've given. Plus, you keep posting in 2 topics.


!rolling
And we haven't even gotten into the DECA menu on the 24s


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dsw2112 said:


> Just remember if you try that approach to leave the BB DECA disconnected for at least 24 hours. You'll also need to MRV with the "problem" receiver during this timeframe.


This could be as simple as pulling the PI to the BB DECA, then doing the receiver's IP "stuff" and then simple looking at the receiver in a few hours, since it seems "to dump" in about 3 hours or less.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

"coit" said:


> And as everyone seems to think this is a bad idea, I guess I'll just post this here as evidence that I'm not the only one who thought this was a good idea.


But I also stated that you should also try moving the DECA units between the two receivers that use them and to also disconnect the Broadband DECA as a test. Also, to reset the receivers to their internal IP address after removing the Broadband DECA, you can just rerun the Automatic Network Setup. It will fail the Internet test, but that is fine.

- Merg

Sent from my iPod touch using DBSTalk


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

veryoldschool said:


> This could be as simple as pulling the PI to the BB DECA, then doing the receiver's IP "stuff" and then simple looking at the receiver in a few hours, since it seems "to dump" in about 3 hours or less.


Since streaming isn't that forgiving a 24 hour period with several MRV sessions will certainly tell a tale


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dsw2112 said:


> Since streaming isn't that forgiving a 24 hour period with several MRV sessions will certainly tell a tale


Yep, that's if it made it past being a "bad receiver" :lol:


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> I still think it's not installed properly. It's hard to tell with all your backtracking and different explanations you've given. Plus, you keep posting in 2 topics.


Well, you'll have to forgive my different explanations. It comes from not knowing what nomenclature you folks are expecting. I haven't given my receivers a moments notice for years before diving into this, and if you want to look for threads I've started, you will see one from January where I knew zero about the whole MRV setup.

And I am posting in two topics because I felt that the information I have uncovered would be useful to others, and I was pointed to the other topic.

As for any confusion about network versus internet. I didn't know until tonight that the H24s could even access the internet. I thought only the DVRs could access the On Demand content, which I believe is true. And the engineer I was speaking with had me see if I could access Apps, and I wasn't even sure what Apps were.

But I think I was pretty clear when I said that the receiver (again, just one) could not see the DVRs. And a ping of all the machines on my network showed that this one receiver would not respond, while all the others did.

So again, I'm not trying to be intentionally confusing.

But is also clear that some of you have additional knowledge that is not being shared. And it is also clear that the folks that actually work for DTV have not asked the same questions that you are asking.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

So then please answer this simple question...

What is the model of your HR20? 

Press and hold INFO button for three seconds. The model number will be shown on the Setup Info screen that pops up.

- Merg

Sent from my iPod touch using DBSTalk


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

The Merg said:


> So then please answer this simple question...
> 
> What is the model of your HR20?
> 
> ...


In the other thread maybe he said a HR20-700


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Just saw that...

- Merg

Sent from my iPod touch using DBSTalk


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Coit:

When you run the system test, what does it show as passing/failing regarding the network? Also, what IP address does the receiver take if you let it obtain one via DHCP?

- Merg

Sent from my iPod touch using DBSTalk


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

The Merg said:


> So then please answer this simple question...
> 
> What is the model of your HR20?


It is an HR20-700


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

The Merg said:


> When you run the system test, what does it show as passing/failing regarding the network? Also, what IP address does the receiver take if you let it obtain one via DHCP?


When you reset the receiver, everything works fine. It continues to work for a few hours, or up to a day as it did from Friday to Saturday, but no one was using it at all during that time, I only went in occasionally to check by hitting the list button.

I haven't set it back to dynamic after I set it to Static, but when the Engineer had me reset to defaults (without rebooting), it took some 169.254.xxx.xxx address, I didn't make a note of it as he said it didn't matter.


----------



## barryb (Aug 27, 2007)

The DECA thats hooked to your HR20-700 looks like this:










From that little rectangular unit (what I call the DECA dongle  ), there should be an ethernet cable that goes _directly_ to your HR20-700 (as well as one COAX line, the other line heads on over to the SWiM). There should be ONLY that one ethernet going into your HR20-700.

If you could take a picture of whats plugged in there at your house, I'm quite sure people here would love to see it.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

barryb said:


> From that little rectangular unit (what I call the DECA dongle  ), there should be an ethernet cable that goes _directly_ to your HR20-700 (as well as one COAX line, the other line heads on over to the SWiM). There should be ONLY that one ethernet going into your HR20-700.


Mine looks just like that. I was discussing it in the other thread as well earlier. I had some confusion over the nomenclature (I thought BB was B-Band, for instance) but I confirmed that it is hooked up the way you have shown. The BB DECA unit has a coax that goes back to my power injector, which is in a different room. I have two coax leads coming from the room where the SWIM and injector are.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

coit said:


> When you reset the receiver, everything works fine. It continues to work for a few hours, or up to a day as it did from Friday to Saturday, but no one was using it at all during that time, I only went in occasionally to check by hitting the list button.
> 
> I haven't set it back to dynamic after I set it to Static, but when the Engineer had me reset to defaults (without rebooting), it took some 169.254.xxx.xxx address, I didn't make a note of it as he said it didn't matter.


Actually, that IP address does matter. The fact that it obtains an IP address of 169.254.x.x means that the receiver is not seeing your network. It also defaults to the subnet mask of 255.255.0.0, which is different than your home network. Because of this, the HR20 is not able to see your other receivers and your other receivers and home network cannot see the HR20.

There are really three possibilities for the cause of this:

1) DECA unit is not connected correctly
2) DECA unit is faulty
3) Ethernet port on receiver is faulty

To determine #3, plug in an ethernet cable from your router to the ethernet port on the receiver. You could even temporarily use the ethernet cable going to the Broadband DECA as for this test we don't care about MRV or that other receivers have Internet access. Once the cable is plugged in, you should have access to the Internet immediately (if you still have the static IP address info in there). If you are using DHCP, you will probably need to rerun the Network setup on the receiver so that it can try to obtain an IP address from your router. If this works, then the issue is #1 or #2.

Swapping DECA units will then help you determine if the issue is #1 or #2.

- Merg


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

The Merg said:


> There are really three possibilities for the cause of this:
> 
> 1) DECA unit is not connected correctly
> 2) DECA unit is faulty
> 3) Ethernet port on receiver is faulty


Since the OP stated earlier that he wanted D* to do the in-depth troubleshooting I "thought" this might be a bit much. Personally I think disconnecting the BB DECA from the router will tell the tale. Once the receivers are isolated to DECA LAN (and on the "D*" IP/subnet) it will point to a defective DECA, NIC, or connection. Once that's definitively known it's D*'s job to swap the DECA or receiver.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

dsw2112 said:


> Since the OP stated earlier that he wanted D* to do the in-depth troubleshooting I "thought" this might be a bit much. Personally I think disconnecting the BB DECA from the router will tell the tale. Once the receivers are isolated to DECA LAN (and on the "D*" IP/subnet) it will point to a defective DECA, NIC, or connection. Once that's definitively known it's D*'s job to swap the DECA or receiver.


Well, the fact that a DirecTV engineer stated that the IP address the receiver had when using DHCP doesn't matter tells that tale right there... :lol:

BTW, my money is on a defective or incorrectly connected DECA. The latter might be corrected when DirecTV replaces the receiver as they will end up disconnecting it and reconnecting it when they install the new receiver. It can even be as simple as the fact that the ethernet patch cable is plugged into the wrong ethernet port on the HR20.

- Merg


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dsw2112 said:


> Since the OP stated earlier that he wanted D* to do the in-depth troubleshooting I "thought" this might be a bit much. Personally I think disconnecting the BB DECA from the router will tell the tale. Once the receivers are isolated to DECA LAN (and on the "D*" IP/subnet) it will point to a defective DECA, NIC, or connection. Once that's definitively known it's D*'s job to swap the DECA or receiver.





The Merg said:


> Well, the fact that a DirecTV engineer stated that the IP address the receiver had when using DHCP doesn't matter tells that tale right there... :lol:
> 
> - Merg


Are you having fun yet? :lol:


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

The Merg said:


> Well, the fact that a DirecTV engineer stated that the IP address the receiver had when using DHCP doesn't matter tells that tale right there... :lol:
> 
> - Merg


Yeah...kinda important huh :lol: It'll be up to the OP as either way will get results.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

No worries, the "engineer" is going to come check it out.


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

The Merg said:


> BTW, my money is on a defective or incorrectly connected DECA. The latter might be corrected when DirecTV replaces the receiver as they will end up disconnecting it and reconnecting it when they install the new receiver. It can even be as simple as the fact that the ethernet patch cable is plugged into the wrong ethernet port on the HR20.
> 
> - Merg





veryoldschool said:


> Are you having fun yet? :lol:


Merg -- I believe VOS was taking bets :lol:


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

dsw2112 said:


> Merg -- I believe VOS was taking bets :lol:


Alright then... I'll put VOS's money down then... :lol:

- Merg


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

The Merg said:


> Alright then... I'll put VOS's money down then... :lol:
> 
> - Merg


Page one is a bit refreshing so see what was asked & suggested long before the latest "rounds".


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

The Merg said:


> Actually, that IP address does matter. The fact that it obtains an IP address of 169.254.x.x means that the receiver is not seeing your network. It also defaults to the subnet mask of 255.255.0.0, which is different than your home network. Because of this, the HR20 is not able to see your other receivers and your other receivers and home network cannot see the HR20.


The HR20 has never been the issue. It is one of the H24s.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

The Merg said:


> Well, the fact that a DirecTV engineer stated that the IP address the receiver had when using DHCP doesn't matter tells that tale right there... :lol:


The receiver can't see the other receivers in the house until it is reset. So it won't get a proper IP from anywhere if you just go into the setup menu without rebooting.

Of couse, I know you are just making fun of me. Lucky for me my skin is pretty darned thick. And that I don't get my entertainment from making fun of people I don't know on message forums.


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

Any luck disconnecting the BB DECA?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

As most know: a H24 has the internal DECA and can run a DECA test that the others can't do.
This was asked about back on page one, but at that time the OP said he had no 24s :shrug:


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

dsw2112 said:


> Any luck disconnecting the BB DECA?


No, family was watching The Bachelor, then I was catching up on some Top Gear episodes.


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

coit said:


> ...I don't have any 24s. Anybody wanna give me one? :lol:





coit said:


> ...The HR20 has never been the issue. It is one of the H24s....





coit said:


> ...And now, a second receiver is losing the ability to see the receivers...





coit said:


> ...The rest of the receivers are fine, and have been fine....


To the OP: I hope you resolve your issue, but it's hard to help when we're all kinda chasing our tails. The 4 pages here have the info to narrow down your issue in a relatively short amount of time. Myself (and others) are willing to help, and might even have a bit of "extra" knowledge that the folks you've spoken to at D* aren't privy to. Let us know when we can be of assistance.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

coit said:


> The HR20 has never been the issue. It is one of the H24s.


An H24 is the issue? Please tell me that there is no dongle on the back of the H24.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

coit said:


> Of couse, I know you are just making fun of me. Lucky for me my skin is pretty darned thick. And that I don't get my entertainment from making fun of people I don't know on message forums.


Oh no... That comment was completely directed at DirecTV...

- Merg


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

coit said:


> The HR20 has never been the issue. It is one of the H24s.


Okay. In the other thread you implied the issue was the HR20. So, your setup should be the following, if I've read both of these threads right...

HR20 with DECA
HR23 with DECA
H24
H24
H24
Broadband DECA plus power supply
SWM PI (power supply for SWM)



Doug Brott said:


> An H24 is the issue? Please tell me that there is no dongle on the back of the H24.


That would definitely cause issues.

- Merg


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

There is no dongle on the back of the H24s. And I did post that another one was having a problem, but that was based on my daughter telling me her's wasn't working, but when I checked it, it was working fine... 

I was giving information about the DECA when talking about the HR20, I don't think I ever said it wasn't working.

And when I said I don't have any "24s" that was in response to someone asking me if I had HR24s. Not H24s.

And as for people here knowing more than the DTV engineers... Clearly I don't have enough information to draw a conclusion there.

Last night, my daughter streamed a one-hour show to her H24, and at the same time I streamed a Top Gear to a second H24. Both worked just fine. So I really don't see how this could be anything but a problem with the 3rd H24, but I clearly don't know everything.

I'm sure there is some logical explanation about how a bad DECA is causing only one receiver out of 5 to have problems on the network. Just hasn't been explained to me yet.

Oh, and I sure wish the HD shows could be as responsive as SD shows like Top Gear when FF and Rewinding. But I'd rather have TG in HD...


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

The Merg said:


> Okay. In the other thread you implied the issue was the HR20. So, your setup should be the following, if I've read both of these threads right...
> 
> HR20 with DECA
> HR23 with DECA
> ...


Yes, this is what I have. I don't know if the HR23 has a DECA on it. I suppose it does if it needs one, I haven't taken a look.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Post #12 clearly states the OP has no 24s in response to a question asking if any were 24s. This wasn't HR, but merely 24s.
There were also the instructions on how to run the DECA network test.
:shrug:


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

coit said:


> Yes, this is what I have. I don't know if the HR23 has a DECA on it. I suppose it does if it needs one, I haven't taken a look.


And you can see the PlayList from the HR20 and HR23 on two of the H24's, but the third H24 doesn't see eitther HR2x, correct?

- Merg


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

It is truly amazing how every bit of the information needed to know what this problem is has been posted and yet not one thing has been done. :eek2:


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

The Merg said:


> And you can see the PlayList from the HR20 and HR23 on two of the H24's, but the third H24 doesn't see eitther HR2x, correct?


Yes. When the 3rd H24 is first powered up, it works fine for some period of time. And by working fine, I mean that if you hit the list button, you see the list of shows on the HR20 and HR23. Also, it responds to ping commands like the other machines.

At some point, it drops off the network. This has happened just while sitting, and also while streaming a program from one of the DVRs. At this point, it does not respond to pings, and the only way to get connectivity back is to reboot. I have tried changing the IP address, and doing a reset to default, then going through the setup again. Neither works. This was tried last night so that I could send the log file to the DTV guy.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

And this would be just the time to run the coax networking test. If this receiver can't find any other DECA nodes, then this receiver needs replacing.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

coit, Could I ask a favor since I'm looking at this late ..

Could you list the following:

All of your receivers model numbers
Type of distribution system (SWiM-LNB - one line from dish to house/splitter or SWiM-8/SWiM-16)
Systems with a DECA dongle on the back
Whether or not you have a broadband DECA

Once we have that, it sounds like there is a very simple test that can be run to make sure you are getting quality results on your DECA network.

Thanks


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> coit, Could I ask a favor since I'm looking at this late ..
> 
> Could you list the following:
> 
> ...


Equipment:

H24-200 (3 units)
HR23-700
HR20-700

Distribution: SWIM-16

DECA Dongles: HR23 and HR20

BB DECA: Yes


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Experts.....Is his 7 tuners on a SWM-16 an issue possibly?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> Experts.....Is his 7 tuners on a SWM-16 an issue possibly?


Shouldn't have any effect, and this should all work fine on a SWMLNB too.
I've got seven tuners on my SWMLNB.
Running the DECA test off a 24, should give a good idea of the losses between nodes and quality [bit-rates] between nodes, not to mention dropped network counts too.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I have no problem with running as few as 5 tuners on an SWiM-16 from time to time.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I have no problem with running as few as 5 tuners on an SWiM-16 from time to time.


Since the SWiM-16 only has to do with DECA with the crossover filter between the two sections of the SWiM-16, there isn't anything interacting. If the SWiM-16 were to have problems, then it would be with the SAT signals and not the DECA networking.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Since the SWiM-16 only has to do with DECA with the crossover filter between the two sections of the SWiM-16, there isn't anything interacting. If the SWiM-16 were to have problems, then it would be with the SAT signals and not the DECA networking.


What about an issue with the crossover filter if the problem H24 was the only receiver off of the SWM2 output? Longshot I know, but...

- Merg


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

The Merg said:


> What about an issue with the crossover filter if the problem H24 was the only receiver off of the SWM2 output? Longshot I know, but...
> 
> - Merg


That's where I was going with it.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

The Merg said:


> What about an issue with the crossover filter if the problem H24 was the only receiver off of the SWM2 output? Longshot I know, but...
> 
> - Merg





sigma1914 said:


> That's where I was going with it.


While it's a thought, since the crossover filter is passive, rebooting the problem receiver shouldn't bring everything back.
Also if this filter was part of the problem, it would be more likely due to loss and this is where the coax network test would show any problems, if it were run.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> That's where I was going with it.


Sure it was... 

- Merg


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Well, I got my replacement receiver today, but I haven't installed it yet. Apparently, I have some special visitors arriving at my house on Friday morning to do some snooping around. Seems like a lot of bother, but they wanted to do it, so I'm happy to let them poke around a bit.

Someone told me in a PM how to do a test on the H24s, so I did that.

INFO - in the 40s on all three
MESH - in the 240s on all three


And, buckling to the incredible peer pressure, I have unplugged the ethernet cable from my BB DECA, and restored all the receivers to the default network settings so that they now have 169.254.x.x addresses or whatever it is.

There were no differences in the INFO and MESH values before and after the change. And, interestingly enough, the "bad" receiver produced the same values as the rest, even though it could not see the DVRs. I rebooted that one afterward.


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

coit said:


> There were no differences in the INFO and MESH values before and after the change. And, interestingly enough, the "bad" receiver produced the same values as the rest, even though it could not see the DVRs. I rebooted that one afterward.


After the reboot was the bad receiver able to "see" the rest? If so, it will be interesting to see how long it's able to do so with the BB DECA disconnected.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

dsw2112 said:


> After the reboot was the bad receiver able to "see" the rest? If so, it will be interesting to see how long it's able to do so with the BB DECA disconnected.


Yes, it was able to pull the list of recordings on the DVR. I'm going to start it playing a recording before bed, and see if it is still connected in the AM.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Well, it didn't stay connected even long enough for me to start a recording. I checked after about 90 minutes, and it had already lost the DVRs.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Sounds like this is a defective H24.
The loss between nodes is well within range and the PHY MESH rates are good too.
DECA is good, but the receiver isn't.


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

coit said:


> Well, it didn't stay connected even long enough for me to start a recording. I checked after about 90 minutes, and it had already lost the DVRs.





veryoldschool said:


> Sounds like this is a defective H24.
> The loss between nodes is well within range and the PHY MESH rates are good too.
> DECA is good, but the receiver isn't.


That'll seal the receiver's fate then... Not much for the guys on Friday to look at given what's been posted.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

I'm going to call them tomorrow and let them know what I found tonight. 

And I guess folks should be glad they didn't bet with me.


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

coit said:


> ...And I guess folks should be glad they didn't bet with me.


"but", you could have proven this much sooner 

Time to break out that replacement receiver.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Yup. All the more reason to give as much info as possible to start off with and try a few different easy trouble-shooting efforts. If we had known from the beginning this was an H24, you had performed the internal tests, and then had tried disconnecting the Broadband DECA, you could have had your answer within the first day or two of your OP.

Glad it seems to be finally resolved.

- Merg


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

The Merg said:


> If we had known from the beginning this was an H24, you had performed the internal tests, and then had tried disconnecting the Broadband DECA, you could have had your answer within the first day or two of your OP.


Sorry, I thought when I mentioned in my first post that I had a "new" setup that it would be implied that my receivers were H24s. That's what I get for thinkin'!

And I didn't know about the internal tests until yesterday afternoon, when someone sent me that info via PM. Is it secret or something?


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

coit said:


> Sorry, I thought when I mentioned in my first post that I had a "new" setup that it would be implied that my receivers were H24s. That's what I get for thinkin'!
> 
> And I didn't know about the internal tests until yesterday afternoon, when someone sent me that info via PM. Is it secret or something?


Never ass-u-me... :lol:

While the goal is to put out H24/HR24 receivers for new installs with WHDVR, it really all depends as to what is at the warehouse.

- Merg


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> If there is a question about the DECA network status and you have any 24s, you can run a test of the coax network. Press guide & > buttons on the front panel to find the menu.





coit said:


> And I didn't know about the internal tests until yesterday afternoon, when someone sent me that info via PM. Is it secret or something?


VOS posted about the internal tests way back on Page 1 of this thread.

- Merg


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

The Merg said:


> VOS posted about the internal tests way back on Page 1 of this thread.


Yeah, I thought that was just a shortcut to get to the tests that you can run from the network setup menu.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

coit said:


> Yeah, I thought that was just a shortcut to get to the tests that you can run from the network setup menu.


Nope. That's the DECA network test for H24/HR24's.

- Merg


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

So, I have 5 guys from DTV here swarming through my house!

And, they seem to think there are multiple issues going on with my install. They are using some sort of handheld tester and say that one DVR doesn't see any of the others, and vice versa (through the SWiM?). However, none of the boxes have any trouble seeing and playing the recordings.

One guy said he met some of you folks at CES, and said while rock stars have beautiful groupies, he only has you! 

My question at this point is this: Is this equipment too technical to be installed by typical satellite installer folks?

And, is it too sensitive to the type and quality of coax cabling and coupling that is typically used?


----------



## Scott Kocourek (Jun 13, 2009)

coit said:


> So, I have 5 guys from DTV here swarming through my house!
> 
> And, they seem to think there are multiple issues going on with my install. They are using some sort of handheld tester and say that one DVR doesn't see any of the others, and vice versa (through the SWiM?). However, none of the boxes have any trouble seeing and playing the recordings.
> 
> ...


1. NO

2. NO


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

coit said:


> So, I have 5 guys from DTV here swarming through my house!
> 
> And, they seem to think there are multiple issues going on with my install. They are using some sort of handheld tester and say that one DVR doesn't see any of the others, and vice versa (through the SWiM?). However, none of the boxes have any trouble seeing and playing the recordings.
> 
> ...


SWiM has nothing to do with the receivers "seeing" one another. SWiM simply move the tuner RF to a different range to not interfere with DECA (networking RF.) The type of coaxial cable is extremely insignificant in regards to RF (for DC power it's important.) The DECA test you ran earlier tells the tale regarding the DECA communication (and that test was well within limits.) The common sense test (the fact that MRV works) coupled with the DECA test would cause "no worries" in this household. There's an old saying "if it aint broke, don't fix it..."


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

It's hard to know what they're seeing, but if it's been working for you, it would seem to be alright.

Since everyone is there now, and there looks to be some question about the DECA, it might be a good idea to run the coax network test for them.
This is the one from the H24s with the guide & > buttons.


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

veryoldschool said:


> ...it might be a good idea to run the coax network test for them.
> This is the one from the H24s with the guide & > buttons....


Yep, depending on who "they" are, they might learn something new as well.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Well, I haven't been following them all over the house, as I'm trying to get a little bit of work done, but I have heard that their device is reporting something like an Error 99 coming from the SWiM.

And I think they were saying that they couldn't see the other receivers as in through the satellite signal distribution, not the IP network. But I'm probably not stating that correctly enough.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

I wonder if what they're seeing is that there are only seven tuner connected to a SWiM-16 and they're connected to both sections, instead of this being a SWM8 or SWiMLNB.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

dsw2112 said:


> Yep, depending on who "they" are, they might learn something new as well.


I think it is somewhat strange that some folks here seem to think that they know more than the guys that designed these systems.

How could that possibly be?

And why do you put "they" in quotation marks?

And of course they have run the coax tests. All of those check out as I posted before.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

coit said:


> I think it is somewhat strange that some folks here seem to think that they know more than the guys that designed these systems.
> 
> How could that possibly be?
> 
> ...


Those who designed the systems don't do installs. There are several people here who are much better informed with respect to install issues than the typical installer may be. There are a few installers here (official ones), who really know what they are doing.

All that said, there have been dozens of posts about mucked up installs by official installers, that have been responded to by people here, and the problems have been fixed, in spite of the installers.

When one runs into problems with an install, this is the place to come....if one actually wants the problem fixed in a timely fashion.

My installs have gone well, partially because before I let them touch a single thing, I make them go through every step they intend to perform with me. At least once, I prevented a major error, due to the information that had been posted here over several months.

So, I don't find it strange that some people here seem to think they know more.....they frequently do, and have proven so many, many times. You do have to be careful who you take advice from (start by looking at the join date and post count), as I've seen some pretty sorry advice coming from people who have little knowledge and a lot of time on their hands.

The CE All Star label is a good bet (top left of post). That establishes that the person has a track record of useful contributions and helping people solve problems.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

hasan said:


> Those who designed the systems don't do installs. There are several people here who are much better informed with respect to install issues than the typical installer may be. There are a few installers here (official ones), who really know what they are doing.


Well, the longer these guys are here, the more I can see your point! I'm not sure what they are chasing now, since everything seems to work properly except the one receiver. But they have realigned the dish, replaced just about all of the barrels on the wall plates, and run all sorts of tests with their handhelds. Now they are investigating why one outlet has a lower power.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

dsw2112 said:


> Yep, depending on who "they" are, they might learn something new as well.


I know who "they" are .. they know what they are doing ..


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

hasan said:


> Those who designed the systems don't do installs. There are several people here who are much better informed with respect to install issues than the typical installer may be. There are a few installers here (official ones), who really know what they are doing.


I promise you, this is more like Tier 17 in the support structure than an normal installer.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

coit said:


> Well, the longer these guys are here, the more I can see your point! I'm not sure what they are chasing now, since everything seems to work properly except the one receiver. But they have realigned the dish, replaced just about all of the barrels on the wall plates, and run all sorts of tests with their handhelds. Now they are investigating why one outlet has a lower power.


Thanks for helping out .. I'm sure that they are looking not just to help you out, but to be able to feed this back into the system for better quality in the future.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

I wonder if what they're seeing is that there are only seven tuner connected to a SWiM-16 and they're connected to both sections, instead of this being a SWM8 or SWiMLNB.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I wonder if what they're seeing is that there are only seven tuner connected to a SWiM-16 and they're connected to both sections, instead of this being a SWM8 or SWiMLNB.





hasan said:


> I wonder if what they're seeing is that there are only seven tuner connected to a SWiM-16 and they're connected to both sections, instead of this being a SWM8 or SWiMLNB.


Hmmm... That sounds familiar... :lol:

- Merg


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

They did boost signal levels to my upstairs (H24s) receivers by moving them around on the SWiM. I guess some ports on the SWiM have higher output than others? So, the shorter runs can afford to be on those ports with lower outputs maybe?

And they did mention that the SWiM8 might help over the SWiM16 I have. But if the signal levels were dropping due to their being multiple devices on a switch, how would they handle when all 16 ports are being used?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Both the SWM8 & SWiM-16 have the same output levels, so more than likely what they did was to move/change the splitter connected to the output.
You'll increase the power to the receiver if you change from an 8-way splitter to a 4-way. Since you only have 5 receivers, you don't have a need for any 8-way splitters.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Both the SWM8 & SWiM-16 have the same output levels, so more than likely what they did was to move/change the splitter connected to the output.
> You'll increase the power to the receiver if you change from an 8-way splitter to a 4-way. Since you only have 5 receivers, you don't have a need for any 8-way splitters.


So, basically a 4-way off of the SWM1 output and connected directly to the SWM2 output.

- Merg


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

The Merg said:


> So, basically a 4-way off of the SWM1 output and connected directly to the SWM2 output.
> 
> - Merg


That, or maybe they both had 8-ways, because installers seem to think these are better [when they're not].
This all kind of goes back to the stickies at the top of this forum about how splitters work.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

Not to offend any installers on the forum, the two that I had were good at making coax jumpers / connections, one was good at dish alignment, and one was 18 and very proud that he had slept through all the training sessions. But this was very early in the installations of Whole Home / DECA last June.

From the information here on the forum, I had pictures and diagrams of the SWim 16 / Deca / Broadband connection that needed to be done. They installed the DECA and HR24 in the living room and I installed the DECAs for the 3 in the Bedroom.

They both thanked me and said they had learned more in the installation than any of the training courses as they left. I also tipped them for letting me do most of the configuration / installation.

It was somewhat ironic that the next week I had roto-rooter out for a stopped drain for $225 for about an hour. I'm sure both of the installer didn't make anything close to that combined!


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> That, or maybe they both had 8-ways, because installers seem to think these are better [when they're not].
> This all kind of goes back to the stickies at the top of this forum about how splitters work.


Sorry. I was referring to how it probably should be hooked up as opposed to using 8-ways...

- Merg


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

The Merg said:


> Sorry. I was referring to how it probably should be hooked up as opposed to using 8-ways...
> 
> - Merg


Someday, I'd like to teach the trainers how to work with splitters and coax lengths, so they can then teach the installers how best to keep all receivers at the strongest signals levels they can be.

An example of this:


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

Well, they are finally gone, so I could actually come into the office for a few hours.

They terminated a few connections on the power injector and I think on the SWiM, they actually swapped out for a second one, but it was no different in power levels. Ultimately, they said they gained about 6-7 dB, so that's probably a pretty good amount.

Receiver was still flaking out, so they put the new one in, and it was working well. I streamed a couple of HD programs on it, and it worked fine.

I'm not sure what they learned in total, but it seemed to me that the installers need much better training than they have. The Mastec supervisors that were there were very knowledgeable.


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

coit said:


> I think it is somewhat strange that some folks here seem to think that they know more than the guys that designed these systems.
> 
> How could that possibly be?.


I don't know; have we not been helpful so far?



coit said:


> And why do you put "they" in quotation marks?.


Because in many cases customers are told that a specialist will be on-site to review their system, and in most cases they are neither a specialist or someone who designed the system. Since I didn't know who the "they" was in your case it was put in quotes.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

dsw2112 said:


> I don't know; have we not been helpful so far?


Well I didn't say that you weren't helpful. I was just asking about an attitude that I perceive.

And again, I recognize that some folks here think I've been making all of this up, but Doug knows who came to visit today. I'm not one to name drop.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Five people, 5-6 hours: changed one receiver, check connectors, terminated opens as needed, and swap a splitter. :eek2:


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

coit said:


> Well I didn't say that you weren't helpful. I was just asking about an attitude that I perceive.
> 
> And again, I recognize that some folks here think I've been making all of this up, but Doug knows who came to visit today. I'm not one to name drop.


I believe the issue is that we were getting frustrated. We provided input and suggestions on things to check and you didn't want to do that. You also wouldn't answer our questions completely and provided us with conflicting information.

While I am glad that your issue appears to be resolved, I think it could have been taken care of within the first week of you posting here.

- Merg


----------



## DrummerBoy523 (Jan 9, 2007)

coit said:


> I think it is somewhat strange that some folks here seem to think that they know more than the guys that designed these systems.
> 
> How could that possibly be?
> 
> ...


because it is true. my last installers didn't know about the network test you can peform on the 24s.


----------



## coit (Feb 13, 2007)

The Merg said:


> You also wouldn't answer our questions completely and provided us with conflicting information.


Look, we've been through that before. I answered with what I thought was the right answers. Been learning as I went along I guess.

At least I have the satisfaction of knowing my initial hunch was correct, right?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

We expect everyone to be learning as they go here, but at the same time we kind of expect suggestions to be taken too, or if not understood, asked about.
Stubbornness didn't help anyone here, so I wouldn't give much credit to anyone"s "hunch", when it could have been found out/proved so much sooner. :nono:


----------

