# Internet Network Congestion/Multiple IPAs . . .



## FarmerBob (Nov 28, 2002)

I have been running tests for a major OEM of networking equipment and in my travels through many firmwares and whatnot I am seeing my Hopper system sucking up IP addresses like mad. For three devices they are taking 2 IPAs for each "Internet" related function, Internet and MoCA, for a possible total of 12 IPAs for the 3 devices I have. Also they are dropping and retaking and dropping and retaking, jumping all over the place. Since I have been having connection issues with those devices, 2 HwS and 1 Joey, between themselves, getting MoCA error icons popping up and the Joey blacking out. The reason I include the Joey blacking out is that when whatever it is that I have to do to get it back works, when the unit "restarts" there is an Internet/MoCA connection error on the screen. I had them all written down on an envelope that I think I shredded. Otherwise I would post the numbers, but will when I get them again. Which shouldn't be long since these "issues" happen a lot.

I have read in a couple of threads of people remarking about congestion on their networks and what could be causing it? Also just read a reply via following threads about not having Bridging turn on more than one HwS at a time. I have a feeling that this thirst of IPAs and how they are acquired is the cause. I have just input the six MAC addresses that have been more prevalent with their own reserved IPAs to see if this doesn't clear up gear failing to perform and or errors popping up.

Anyone have any insight on this? I know multiple IPAs can be assigned to a single MAC address, but never needed to address it. This is the first time I have seen hardware be so needy and I have been DIYing networks for years.

Is there a way to force these things to behave and operate a tad "cleaner"? I guess my next step will probably be input all my devices and lock down the IPA range so that these things can't "wander".


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Do you suppose that assigning an IP for each MAC is going to cause a typical residential customer to have DHCP table overcrowding issues?

Are you jealous that your DISH equipment consumes more India Pale Ales than you do?


----------



## FarmerBob (Nov 28, 2002)

harsh said:


> Do you suppose that assigning an IP for each MAC is going to cause a typical residential customer to have DHCP table overcrowding issues?
> 
> Are you jealous that your DISH equipment consumes more India Pale Ales than you do?


It's actually multiple IPAs per MAC Address, that's the problem, and a toss up. Table Overcrowding or IPA Congestion due to frequent and continuous IPA refreshing and hopping. I would surmise that with the Internet connection gear that is available these days that these issues would be a thing of the past and why the DISH gear may have been designed to act in the this manner? But in the wrong direction when they have their MoCA network. . . Since I have "secluded" my three devices by locking them down as much as possible and this seems to have "calmed them down". At least in an initial glance. Will have to give it a couple of days to succumb or rebel. Haven't heard any screams of the Joey going out again last night. I was under the impression that with MoCA that the DISH gear would do all the heavy lifting through its own connections and not tromp on the network they are connected to and interfering with other unrelated devices? Since taking one HwS off WiFi and using "Bridging" with the HwS that is hardwired, devices on the WiFi network are not having as many connection or speed issues.

As I mentioned I have seen this mentioned before and think that this voracious appetite of the DISH gear is the root of many network issues that people are reporting.

I am purist and IPAs are not a personal choice. But the fact that my DISH gear is consuming any alcoholic beverages might explain why they are not "functioning properly". I know this functional disparity well from my younger days and thank goodness I have out grown it. Just waiting/hoping for DISH to do so.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

FarmerBob said:


> It's actually multiple IPAs per MAC Address, that's the problem, and a toss up.


IP aliasing probably isn't happening on a DISH DVR.

Bridging brings new MAC addresses (up to three on the HWS) to the party so that's not aliasing. If DISH is assigning IP addresses to unconnected MACs, that's a problem they need to address.

I suppose it is possible that the DISH equipment caching stale DHCP assignments and that's something DISH could fix, but it shouldn't show up in the router's DHCP table unless the router's DHCPD implementation is broken. DHCP is supposed to exchange the old IP for the new IP, not add a new one.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I only have one IP per device in my DHCP table:
Joey_MoCA LAN 192.168.xxx.246 00:13:B6:xx:xx:xx
Hopper_MoCA LAN 192.168.xxx.247 00:13:B6:xx:xx:xx
Joey_MoCA LAN 192.168.xxx.248 00:13:B6:xx:xx:xx
Hopper_br LAN 192.168.xxx.249 00:13:B6:xx:xx:xx

I have one Hopper connected to the home network ... the rest of the equipment is connected only via coax (MoCA).


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

FarmerBob - I think your problem here is the networking equipment you're testing - not the Hopper/Joey equipment. You need to let them know there is something not right on their DHCPD code.


----------



## FarmerBob (Nov 28, 2002)

Nope not my networking gear. This is only happening with the DISH gear. All my other gear including those pieces that can connect using both WiFi and Hardwire where only taking one IPA per MAC device connected. If up to 3 MAC addresses can pop up, as described above, that'll explain where they're all coming from. But why are they releasing and reconnecting continuously? That's the problem. It's making quite a commotion on the network. I bet this the problem that others are unknowingly complaining about? If they have stock set ups this will really make a mess. Even though I have several devices that are registered for a MAC Address for WiFi and hardwire, since they can connect through both, and they only grab one IPA per the MAC Addresses assigned to the NICs involved. But with the DISH gear I am seeing the same MAC asking for and getting an additional IPA for the same MAC in addition to each device having multiple MACs. When I disconnected a second HwS from the network and only let everything get IPAs through the hardwired HwS, hoping they should through MoCA, the commotion went away. Now after a couple of days or so each device is only taking the one IPA per device as assigned in reservations and not asking for more. It looks as though if you have more than one HwS hooked up to the network with Bridging turned on one HwS, you get devices pulling 1-2 IPAs per device MAC per Internet Connection. In my case 3 devices x (2 IPAs per MAC X 2 MACs per) = 12. So if 3 MACs per HwS + the Joey pulled 2 IPAs it would be 16 IPAs. What a pig!

*AND* since isolating things, the Joey has yet to go out as it has been. It was getting pretty bad, several times an hour and nothing since. I have noticed that when you do a Network reset is says that it will disrupt Joeys. So I'm pretty sure that it was the Network commotion that was causing the Joey to periodically Blackout as others have mentioned. I wonder if this is their problem too? I never had imagined that the DISH gear would be so network "involved and disruptive".

I have pulled the extraneous IPAs from the Reservations List, consolidating the IPAs and the hardwired HwS just does not want to behave. I have noticed from day one, 20ish years ago, DISH gear does as it pleases others be damned and has been that way since. I'm trying to get it to pull the IPA it had and it just won't. It's pulling an "internal" null address string that is not on the network. I have reset, restarted and power cycled it and no joy. It's in a time out right now and I will revisit later.

Looks like is some major cleaning up to do on DISHs end . . . Which just may solve a lot of peoples issues with their networks?

Early the next day:
Time out over. The hardwired HwS took the assigned IPA and now all the MoCA devices are also getting their assigned "1" IPA. And the MoCA MAC on the hardwired HwS is now the same as the NIC for the hardwire. The network is calm now and I can feel a difference in other devices now that hey are now being shoved all over the place. And things are faster. It's always been said that one little hiccup on a network can bring the whole thing to a halt. Well not that bad here, but it slowed down when all those IPA were jumping all around. Also, still no Joey Blackouts since the isolation.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

That seems to be your problem then... There was no need to have both Hoppers connected to the network when you have bridging enabled. I'm not surprised you were getting multiple IPs because essentially you were "asking" them to do that by having both Hoppers connected.

If I connect my iMac's ethernet port to a router and also enable WiFi on my iMac, then my iMac will pull two IP addresses from the gateway... because that is what I'm "asking" it to do by having both methods connected simultaneously.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

If you had both Hoppers doing bridging - that is probably you're biggest issue.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

FarmerBob said:


> Nope not my networking gear. This is only happening with the DISH gear.


DISH gear isn't assigning the IP addresses, that's either you or your router.

A proper DHCP server won't, under any circumstance I can think of, assign multiple IP addresses to the same MAC. If the router is showing that it has allocated three addresses to the same MAC, that router is BROKEN. That's why testing is important.

I did some googling and found a reference in the IETF website about getting multiple IP addresses using client identifiers instead of MAC addresses but that was typically a result of running multiple operating systems with much more sophisticated DHCP servers (ones that support client identifiers).

https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg/current/msg10939.html


----------



## FarmerBob (Nov 28, 2002)

harsh said:


> DISH gear isn't assigning the IP addresses, that's either you or your router.
> 
> A proper DHCP server won't, under any circumstance I can think of, assign multiple IP addresses to the same MAC. If the router is showing that it has allocated three addresses to the same MAC, that router is BROKEN. That's why testing is important.
> 
> ...


I didn't say that the DISH gear, really Echostar, was assigning IPAs. It was requesting them. Me nor my router are assigning any IPAs on the fly. In all reality the gear was probably spoofing to get them? My router is a couple of months old and it's just fine. It has it's issues, but if it were in fact doing as you say, it would be doing it with all devices connected. It's not, just DISH when there are more that one DISH devices connected to the internet and each other. And as I said, once I isolated things and have only one source for the Internet connection everything calmed down and the Joey quit blacking out as many have mentioned happen to them. And the IP range is wide enough for them to try to grab another IP if they want, but that is no longer happening. And as your link mentions "holding new leases until the old one expires". That is an event that usually happens over the extended set course of time. Not continuously and randomly over the course of minutes. Thus, network congestion. But again as I have said, now that the Hopper system is only getting one source for the Internet, all "these" issues are gone. I'm surprised that the settings would allow you to activate a connection if it already had one? All my devices that can connect via Hardwire and WiFi only register one IPA per MAC. Except the Hoppers. I would think that if the MoCA sections see that other devices have direct connections, it would shut down that "sharing" and needing of multiple IPAs when more than one device has a connection. But in afterthought, that seems a bit too sophisticated for Echostar.


----------



## FarmerBob (Nov 28, 2002)

Stewart Vernon said:


> That seems to be your problem then... There was no need to have both Hoppers connected to the network when you have bridging enabled. I'm not surprised you were getting multiple IPs because essentially you were "asking" them to do that by having both Hoppers connected.
> 
> If I connect my iMac's ethernet port to a router and also enable WiFi on my iMac, then my iMac will pull two IP addresses from the gateway... because that is what I'm "asking" it to do by having both methods connected simultaneously.


It also took "extra" IPAs with bridging off. The second device needed to be physically disconnected from the network. And yes with my Mac gear, mostly my MBP that I connect via Ethernet and WiFi it only ever has gotten, asked for, I have ever seen 1 IPA per connection type. Even my Mac Tower with both only gets 1 IPA per MAC. That's why I was surprised to see the DISH gear get two+ per MAC. Or any of the other machines or devices connected to our network.

My point is one device, one connection, bridged (two connections), 3+ IPAs? At the most I would expect 2. One per MAC device. And another source of being surprised is I have never seen one MAC get two IPAs.


----------



## FarmerBob (Nov 28, 2002)

scooper said:


> If you had both Hoppers doing bridging - that is probably you're biggest issue.


Only had one Hopper set to Bridge. Even with Bridging off, it was the two being connected to the network. But all fixed now.

I just hope that this thread will answer questions for those that have had Joey blackout issues and network congestion. Once I cleaned things up it all went away.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

FarmerBob said:


> I didn't say that the DISH gear, really Echostar, was assigning IPAs. It was requesting them.


A client can request IP addresses as many times as it wants (although it should respect the lease time). It is up to the DHCP server to give them just one at a time. If it fails in that task, it is a broken DHCP server implementation that must be fixed before being unleashed in the wild.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

FarmerBob said:


> I just hope that this thread will answer questions for those that have had Joey blackout issues and network congestion. Once I cleaned things up it all went away.


I'm not sure that I've gathered what you did to "clean things up". Could you explain it in 20 words or less?


----------



## FarmerBob (Nov 28, 2002)

harsh said:


> I'm not sure that I've gathered what you did to "clean things up". Could you explain it in 20 words or less?


I'll try.

"If you have a network congestion problem and you have more than one Hopper, make sure you don't have more than one Hopper or Internet source connected to your network." 29


----------



## FarmerBob (Nov 28, 2002)

harsh said:


> A client can request IP addresses as many times as it wants (although it should respect the lease time). It is up to the DHCP server to give them just one at a time. If it fails in that task, it is a broken DHCP server implementation that must be fixed before being unleashed in the wild.


It started with multiple Hoppers as connection sources, and stopped when it was isolated to one as a source. No broken anything, just connection hungry Echostar equipment abusing the basic parameters of networking. It's long been fixed now and it didn't take doing anything with my networking equipment. Everybody is all happy and squishy for now. I know something else will pop up sooner or later.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

From your description, it doesn't sound like "abuse" to be... you connect both Hoppers to the internet, both will ask for IP addresses. When you enable bridging you only need to connect one Hopper... so I don't even know why you would connect both Hoppers. I mean, the whole point of bridging is to share the connection so that you don't have to connect both to the Internet.

When you connect both to the Internet, they will both ask for IP addresses... leading to the congestion you speak of. Like I said earlier, my computer will do this too. If I connect ethernet and WiFi then my computer will pull two IP addresses from the router because that is what it is meant to do.

I have to disable one connection type or the other (or disconnect the physical ethernet of course) to stop that from happening. If left alone, and all ports are enabled... my computer will pull as many IP addresses as I enable it to.

I suppose they could design a system with fallback so that multiple connections could exist and used only if the primary one fails... That would be a smart thing... but it would be more complicated than these types of devices are usually meant to be for that sort of thing.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

FarmerBob said:


> No broken anything.


Something with your DHCP server _seems_ broken. You divined a way of avoiding the pitfall and that is useful here.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Stewart Vernon said:


> I suppose they could design a system with fallback so that multiple connections could exist and used only if the primary one fails... That would be a smart thing... but it would be more complicated than these types of devices are usually meant to be for that sort of thing.


Failover is important to facilitate reliability but multiple LAN connections are sometimes used to broaden a device's network bandwidth.


----------



## FarmerBob (Nov 28, 2002)

Stewart Vernon said:


> From your description, it doesn't sound like "abuse" to be... you connect both Hoppers to the internet, both will ask for IP addresses. When you enable bridging you only need to connect one Hopper... so I don't even know why you would connect both Hoppers. I mean, the whole point of bridging is to share the connection so that you don't have to connect both to the Internet.
> 
> When you connect both to the Internet, they will both ask for IP addresses... leading to the congestion you speak of. Like I said earlier, my computer will do this too. If I connect ethernet and WiFi then my computer will pull two IP addresses from the router because that is what it is meant to do.
> 
> ...


My "abuse"?! That's rich and very fanboy of you. Anybody could have done it. OH WAIT! anybody did, it was the installer that had me help him do it "so that there would be no "issues" with all the devices connecting".

Did you actually read what the problem was? Let me refresh your memory, the units were pulling 2-3 IPAs per MAC. That is not normal and what caused the network congestion. That was the problem. If they only grabbed one IPA per MAC, as all the rest of my gear does and they do now, no congestion, I would have never had a problem, thus would have not posted here and given you all so much entertainment. And the issue is now a moot point, although there might be something that DISH might want to look into.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

FarmerBob said:


> It started with multiple Hoppers as connection sources, and stopped when it was isolated to one as a source. No broken anything, just *connection hungry Echostar equipment abusing the basic parameters of networking*. It's long been fixed now and it didn't take doing anything with my networking equipment. Everybody is all happy and squishy for now. I know something else will pop up sooner or later.





FarmerBob said:


> My "abuse"?! That's rich and very fanboy of you. Anybody could have done it. OH WAIT! anybody did, it was the installer that had me help him do it "so that there would be no "issues" with all the devices connecting".
> 
> Did you actually read what the problem was? Let me refresh your memory, the units were pulling 2-3 IPAs per MAC. That is not normal and what caused the network congestion. That was the problem. If they only grabbed one IPA per MAC, as all the rest of my gear does and they do now, no congestion, I would have never had a problem, thus would have not posted here and given you all so much entertainment. And the issue is now a moot point, although there might be something that DISH might want to look into.


I was quoting your earlier post... and I quoted it again for this reply. You said "...connection hungry Echostar equipment abusing..." I said I didn't see that as "abuse" but rather the equipment behaving as expected when multiple devices are connected to the Internet via multiple methods.

I never said you abused anything... You brought up "abuse" and I quoted and responded to that. I really don't know how you could misunderstand your own quote and take offense to a response to it in that manner.

From reading your experience... you connected multiple Hoppers to the Internet while they were bridged and they collectively pulled too many IP addresses... then you disconnected one of the Hoppers and the problem went away. All I said is that seems normal to me. You connect multiple methods and the receivers will pull multiple IP addresses that they don't need... connect the receivers in the intended way with bridging enabled you had no problems.

I'm not sure where this goes to insults from that.


----------



## FarmerBob (Nov 28, 2002)

Stewart Vernon said:


> I was quoting your earlier post... and I quoted it again for this reply. You said "...connection hungry Echostar equipment abusing..." I said I didn't see that as "abuse" but rather the equipment behaving as expected when multiple devices are connected to the Internet via multiple methods.
> 
> I never said you abused anything... You brought up "abuse" and I quoted and responded to that. I really don't know how you could misunderstand your own quote and take offense to a response to it in that manner.
> 
> ...


It's called posting to the Internet, where there is a lack of verbal context and inflection that when read it may not always accurately convey the "message" properly. I should know better since I have known and taught this. I used the term "abuse" loosely and as what I learned from the old guard in the old days as a term when a networked device was acting in a manner that was not conducive to proper network behavior. What sparked me was when was made personal when it was said that I did what caused the issues that I was having, not having done so and post as much. Both units were connected to the network at install by the installer. Not me, as the conversation went. I was here just trying to get info.

The HwS pulling 3 IPA per MAC is not a normal networked device occurrence and it caused network disruption. Although a MAC can have multiple IPAs it is not normal and can disrupt the network. Most of the time this is seen in a sever situation where the server is performing multiple roles/services. But it is then recommended that each service or role be assigned a separate IPA to avoid the network congestion that happened. Anyone could and probably has unknowingly stumbled on this where it should not be an occurrence at all to avoid those that would not know form having problems. This just may be why there are those that are having Joey blackout problems? I'm just a person that posted it here.

Now that I have it all wrangled in, everything is working just fine and my Joey that was blacking out several times an hour, has not gone out at all since. Prior to posting I submitted to DISH the question of how reliant are the boxes on a network connection and from what I have learned from DISH is that the Hopper system at this time is not all that reliant on a network, BUT WILL in the future. I have since relayed this thread and my situation to them and have not gotten a reply other than what has already been said. So since I have this "resolved" and all is working and until DISH responds to the information I sent, for the most part this is a moot point now.

Sorry for the confusion and the intrusion.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

No problem... I don't disagree with you that the Hopper sounds like it is doing way more than it should be even in that configuration if it is pulling multiple IP addresses per MAC. There are multiple MACs that would pull more IP addresses than necessary in that configuration and still probably cause at least some of the network congestion you were talking about anyway.

I thought the argument came out of nowhere all of a sudden there, so I wanted to be sure you knew I was responding to your use of the phrase initially and not saying you were doing anything intentional. Also, if the installers hooked things up that way for you, that's a whole different part of the problem that it's good you let Dish know about because they shouldn't want installers making extra connections that not only aren't necessary but cause problems as well.

I could still make the case that your original configuration would be nice IF they would design the firmware to make use of the multiple paths to your router as failover or to enhance network performance... but it sounds like it just makes a mess of things and maybe we're better off if they don't muck around too much with the coding to try and do that.


----------



## Blowgun (May 23, 2008)

If you have a static LAN, can the Hopper still connect or is it limited to DHCP only?


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

You need DHCP running on your network. However, there is nothing stopping you from always assiging the same network gear based on MAC address.

One of my friends runs a VERY tight network at home, with just barely enough DHCP addresses for the family's devices. I run with a wide open pool compared to him - 100 addresses in the pool, plus certain IPs outside of the pool assigned by the router. We both use difficult to impossible AES wireless codes.


----------



## Blowgun (May 23, 2008)

That's disappointing to learn that DISH's flagship receiver lacks basic network settings to configure a static network. Shoot, even my 7 year old Samsung TV is capable of doing that.

I'm familiar with reduced DHCP pool size or using Address Reservations, either of which would mean having to enable the DHCP server. Like professional networks, for me a static assignment is more desirable. As to wireless, all of my WLAN devices statically connect with WPA2-PSK (AES) and use 64 random hexadecimal characters for the passphrase. I don't bother with MAC filtering since all that does is provide a false sense of security, while the WPS pin is disabled for real security reasons.

OTOH, my Hopper wants to connect to some neighbor's open router, maybe I'll just let it connect. :lol:

Thank you for the info.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Blowgun said:


> That's disappointing to learn that DISH's flagship receiver lacks basic network settings to configure a static network. Shoot, even my 7 year old Samsung TV is capable of doing that.


Your seven year old TV probably doesn't have three network ports (RJ45, Wi-fi and MoCA).


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

FarmerBob said:


> The HwS pulling 3 IPA per MAC is not a normal networked device occurrence and it caused network disruption.


You continue to insist that your DHCP server should be held harmless even though it has sole responsibility for assigning IP addresses?

I really doubt that the Hopper is using client identifier (chaddr) based DHCP requests.


----------



## Blowgun (May 23, 2008)

harsh said:


> Your seven year old TV probably doesn't have three network ports (RJ45, Wi-fi and MoCA).


Two of three are available, but the method of delivery isn't the issue.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

Farmer Bob - you could try putting both Hoppers on coax, and none of the Joeys, and see what happens. I would suggest using a dedicated ethernet switch for this, however. You would need one Hopper doing the bridging thing though.

I might also suggest you try turning of all bridging and seeing what IP's the Dish equipment uses when it is just a non-connected MOCA network.


----------

