Hey guys,
My nexus 10 had a gray Wi-Fi bar and is failing to connect any of the Google services such as play store, search app, or gmail. Basically GAPPS. I cannot find a solution to this besides factory resetting, can someone help? My tablet is on stock rooted.
Thanks!
add12364
My N10 either has a grey WiFi bar or it disconnects completely. This happens very often and occurs no matter what rom I have, even stock. I've always felt that the WiFi has always had issues but never got resolved. I've looked around for solutions but not found any. Much appreciated if someone explained or had a solution.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk HD
I completely cannot use Google play, someone please help.
Toggle the Wifi off and then back on a few seconds later.
If this doesnt fix anything then you need to modify your router settings to be compatible.
Don't use 5g on router.
Sent from my Nexus 10
5GHz networks work fine on this tablet.
trickster2369 said:
Don't use 5g on router.
Sent from my Nexus 10
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No offense meant, but that's a pretty silly claim. The transmission technology involved (2.4GHz/5GHz) or protocol (802.11a/b/g/n/ac) has no bearing on the color of the Wi-Fi indicator, which indicates just one thing: does a request to Google's secure servers work, or not? It's virtually always a problem with the network setup, be it with the ISP or the router blocking a port. OP should try using a public access point (coffee shop or something) or mobile hotspot to see if they're able to connect that way.
EniGmA1987 said:
5GHz networks work fine on this tablet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My apologies. There was a lot of discussion concerning the use of 5ghz when the tablet was released. My comment was more of a suggestion than an absolute, and probably wasn't written the best.
Rirere said:
No offense meant, but that's a pretty silly claim. The transmission technology involved (2.4GHz/5GHz) or protocol (802.11a/b/g/n/ac) has no bearing on the color of the Wi-Fi indicator, which indicates just one thing: does a request to Google's secure servers work, or not? It's virtually always a problem with the network setup, be it with the ISP or the router blocking a port. OP should try using a public access point (coffee shop or something) or mobile hotspot to see if they're able to connect that way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
None taken. I was under the impression that grey/no bars, meant that there was no signal or there was a connection issue. I had no idea that the wifi state on the tablet had anything to do with Googles secure servers. I would like to learn more about that, if you would be so kind.
trickster2369 said:
None taken. I was under the impression that gray/no bars, meant that there was no signal or there was a connection issue. I had no idea that the wifi state on the tablet had anything to do with Googles secure servers. I would like to learn more about that, if you would be so kind.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Wi-Fi state doesn't depend on the connection to Google's servers-- that's why it's quite possible to get full graybars. You'll also notice that if your Wi-Fi goes to sleep, when you wake up a (stock) Android device, you should basically always see it gray first, then turn blue after a second or so (speed depends on how good your connection is).
It's also not as simple as just going to google.com, because you can (usually) do that regardless of the status reported. That's because going to google.com only relies on basic HTTP/HTTPS web traffic through ports 80 and 443, which on most functioning networks are never going to be blocked (mostly because it would make even basic web browsing more or less impossible without workarounds). All of your "real" transactions with Google (Gmail sync, location reporting, etc.) happen through secured connections that run on different ports.
Some networks will block those ports for security reasons (the more ports you have open, the greater the network's functionality-- and its vulnerability to outside attack). In those situations, you'll see a gray bar indicating that while you've got connectivity, you won't be able to establish the connection to Google needed for some services to run (most importantly, any GCM/C2DM-based push notifications).
And no problem. Unfortunately, many OEMs muck around with the iconography, making this distinction meaningless on a pretty wide range of devices. It's annoying because this is one of the more common reasons that Google services don't work.
Rirere said:
The Wi-Fi state doesn't depend on the connection to Google's servers-- that's why it's quite possible to get full graybars. You'll also notice that if your Wi-Fi goes to sleep, when you wake up a (stock) Android device, you should basically always see it gray first, then turn blue after a second or so (speed depends on how good your connection is).
It's also not as simple as just going to google.com, because you can (usually) do that regardless of the status reported. That's because going to google.com only relies on basic HTTP/HTTPS web traffic through ports 80 and 443, which on most functioning networks are never going to be blocked (mostly because it would make even basic web browsing more or less impossible without workarounds). All of your "real" transactions with Google (Gmail sync, location reporting, etc.) happen through secured connections that run on different ports.
Some networks will block those ports for security reasons (the more ports you have open, the greater the network's functionality-- and its vulnerability to outside attack). In those situations, you'll see a gray bar indicating that while you've got connectivity, you won't be able to establish the connection to Google needed for some services to run (most importantly, any GCM/C2DM-based push notifications).
And no problem. Unfortunately, many OEMs muck around with the iconography, making this distinction meaningless on a pretty wide range of devices. It's annoying because this is one of the more common reasons that Google services don't work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Would you happen to know if roms can affect wifi reception?
ikenvape said:
Would you happen to know if roms can affect wifi reception?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ROMs and kernels shouldn't affect reception in a technical sense (unless the kernel developer really messes up or something), but they will affect what your device can do with the signal it has. There are also various modes your device can follow that offer compromises (i.e. for CDMA devices, EVRC-B vs. EVRC-C -- one is better for normal usage, the other holds clearer calls with low signal).
Rirere said:
ROMs and kernels shouldn't affect reception in a technical sense (unless the kernel developer really messes up or something), but they will affect what your device can do with the signal it has. There are also various modes your device can follow that offer compromises (i.e. for CDMA devices, EVRC-B vs. EVRC-C -- one is better for normal usage, the other holds clearer calls with low signal).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really appreciate the reply Rirere
I tried several lately. Since day one I have been receiving such poor reception. We have heavy wireless users here ranging from multiple game stations,phones tablets ,PC's etc. All have been receiving full strength except for the N10. From what your saying it seems like I have adjust the router for this one.
ikenvape said:
Really appreciate the reply Rirere
I tried several lately. Since day one I have been receiving such poor reception. We have heavy wireless users here ranging from multiple game stations,phones tablets ,PC's etc. All have been receiving full strength except for the N10. From what your saying it seems like I have adjust the router for this one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you be a little more specific? Android has some nasty Wi-Fi issues (never have as many on my iOS devices), but the situation you describe doesn't sound like it helps. I'm the student manager at a college helpdesk, so we sometimes have this kind of problem in the dorms. If you give some more info about your setup, I might be able to at least point you in the right direction.
Things like what's the make and model of the router, where it's located, how close are neighbors, and so on. You can also use this app (https://play.google.com/store/apps/...SwxLDEsImNvbS5mYXJwcm9jLndpZmkuYW5hbHl6ZXIiXQ) to see if there's channel interference. If your router is new enough, you could also potentially kick it up to use 5GHz only (although that causes lower speeds the further you get much faster than auto 2.4GHz/5GHz).
Rirere said:
Could you be a little more specific? Android has some nasty Wi-Fi issues (never have as many on my iOS devices), but the situation you describe doesn't sound like it helps. I'm the student manager at a college helpdesk, so we sometimes have this kind of problem in the dorms. If you give some more info about your setup, I might be able to at least point you in the right direction.
Things like what's the make and model of the router, where it's located, how close are neighbors, and so on. You can also use this app (https://play.google.com/store/apps/...SwxLDEsImNvbS5mYXJwcm9jLndpZmkuYW5hbHl6ZXIiXQ) to see if there's channel interference. If your router is new enough, you could also potentially kick it up to use 5GHz only (although that causes lower speeds the further you get much faster than auto 2.4GHz/5GHz).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your too kind Reiere Thank you,
I'm using a Media Link MWN-WAPR150N. I see, it doesn't support 5ghz which seems to be a total bummer. I could have sworn that I purchased a dual band model. It's a wonderful device as I'm not having to constantly power cycle it like in the past. We do catch a neighboring facility's wifi here on our devices so I believe this can be causing interference and it would be best to switch up to a 5ghz router? Definitely will check out the app. Thanks allot. I apologize for the ignorance in this area.
ikenvape said:
Your too kind Reiere Thank you,
I'm using a Media Link MWN-WAPR150N. I see, it doesn't support 5ghz which seems to be a total bummer. I could have sworn that I purchased a dual band model. It's a wonderful device as I'm not having to constantly power cycle it like in the past. We do catch a neighboring facility's wifi here on our devices so I believe this can be causing interference and it would be best to switch up to a 5ghz router? Definitely will check out the app. Thanks allot. I apologize for the ignorance in this area.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're almost always going to get some degree of interference from other devices. How bad it is depends on the power of your neighbors' rig and its proximity. Other items, such as microwaves can cause temporary disruptions in wireless power, but it's much more unusual these days than it was in the past.
Given the way other devices in your network seem to be functioning alright, it might be a device-side issue. However, before that I would look into a Wi-Fi analyzing app like I posted earlier and try setting your network to a particular channel. If you pick one clear of your neighbors' wireless network, then if it's set to auto (which it probably is), it should adjust around yours and grant you a clear channel. (two networks on auto can occasionally snarl with one another, and the one with more power is going to win. Since yours is a single-band N home router, there's a good chance you'd lose with the routers out these days).
Related
Why is WMWiFiRouter always on and everybody can always connect even when I'm not running the software? It seems like the only way to stop it is to turn off the WiFi on my phone. Is there a way I can get it to run only when I want too? Is there a limitation on how many people can connect to it? Thanks for your help and time!
Apota said:
Why is WMWiFiRouter always on and everybody can always connect even when I'm not running the software? It seems like the only way to stop it is to turn off the WiFi on my phone. Is there a way I can get it to run only when I want too? Is there a limitation on how many people can connect to it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I've seen, WMWifiRouter uses a peer-to-peer wireless network that it uses to essentially "forward" packets to the cellular network. The thing is, shutting down WMWifiRouter doesn't shut down the peer-to-peer wireless network, so it still broadcasts that the network exists. It won't actually do anything with that network (i.e. there's no cellular network access via it), but it maintains it. So, you can either shutdown wifi, as you've noticed, or you can have your phone connect to a different wifi network. Either works.
As for the last question, I don't know if there's much of a limitation, but I would imagine that it's probably dependent upon the limitations of your hardware or Windows Mobile. Theoretically, depending upon the subnet, it probably supports up to 253 users (x.x.x.2 - x.x.x.254), but it would probably choke and die from performance reasons before that.
Well, this brings up some other issues then. I thought that it would only broadcast a few feet because I assumed the power my cell phone puts out is very weak. This isn't the case. I tested it by walking down the street and I could stilll connect up to 6 houses down the street. That means that anybody within 200-300 feet can connect to the internet through my cell phone since it's unsecured. This worries me, especually since unlimited people can connect to it. If I'm in a public place or a hotel, etc. where I could be using it, so can tons of other people. This can be a real big problem. Is there a solution to this?
Another thing is that even though you aren't running the WMWiFiRouter software and if you have your WiFi turned on people can still connect to your phone. Thanks!
Sogarth said:
From what I've seen, WMWifiRouter uses a peer-to-peer wireless network that it uses to essentially "forward" packets to the cellular network. The thing is, shutting down WMWifiRouter doesn't shut down the peer-to-peer wireless network, so it still broadcasts that the network exists. It won't actually do anything with that network (i.e. there's no cellular network access via it), but it maintains it. So, you can either shutdown wifi, as you've noticed, or you can have your phone connect to a different wifi network. Either works.
As for the last question, I don't know if there's much of a limitation, but I would imagine that it's probably dependent upon the limitations of your hardware or Windows Mobile. Theoretically, depending upon the subnet, it probably supports up to 253 users (x.x.x.2 - x.x.x.254), but it would probably choke and die from performance reasons before that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have version .85, is there a later version and if so how do I get it? Is there a way to setup security on it or via the NIC driver? Thanks.
This is driving me insane!
When I have WiFi enabled at the office, my Samsung Galaxy Note (stock ICS, rooted) constantly receives incoming data and I haven't got a clue which setting, app or service is causing this.
SystemPanel registers a nonstop stream of incoming traffic at 8 to 10 Kbps.
TrafficStats shows an accumulation of Received data under Total WiFi, but can't seem to link it a particular app or service: after resetting the data, no processes appear but the incoming data keeps on growing.
All sync options are off, I've tried to kill every running app or service (one by one, all at once), I've tried to block all traffic using Droidwall. As soon as WiFi is enabled, the incoming stream is unstoppable. When switching to 3G, there's no incoming traffic.
But to make matters even more mysterious, I do not have this problem with my WiFi connection at home.
It only occurs at the office, only on WiFi and (as far as I know) only on my phone.
Any ideas?
This is simply because your wifi antenna still "hears" the data going trough the wireless network on wich you are connecter. Event if your phone doesn't asks for any data at the moment the traffic there is on the network will still be counted by the wifi chip on your phone.
It will be the same on any public network or if you have another phone or a computer connecter on the same wireless router and generating traffic.
Thanks for replying, John!
That sounds very plausible, but then I still have to figure out why only my phone is registering this traffic - maybe it's an ICS thing or brand specific?
And I'll try to 'reproduce' it at home by connecting a laptop at the same time.
I think that the above is correct. That may be default behavior.
Sent from my XT862 using xda app-developers app
Well, I've tried to connect several devices at once on my home WiFi network, but it did not reproduce the incoming traffic problem I experience at work.
There were a few incoming bytes registered, not nearly as much as the constant stream of 10 Kbps at the office network...
Your works wifi may be set up like that. Who Knows?
Sent from my XT862 using xda app-developers app
MrObvious said:
Your works wifi may be set up like that. Who Knows?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, our it-department certainly does not.
You're probably right that this is normal behavior. I'll just have to figure out which drains less battery under these circumstances, WiFi or 3G. Thanks anyway for replying.
I'm on the mobile app, but if you have GSM then just switch to 2g until you use it.
Sent from my xt862 using xda app-developers app
Djezpur said:
Well, I've tried to connect several devices at once on my home WiFi network, but it did not reproduce the incoming traffic problem I experience at work.
There were a few incoming bytes registered, not nearly as much as the constant stream of 10 Kbps at the office network...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
About this, it is simply that at your office there is traffic on the network (download/upload) while at home simply having devices connected doesn't generate traffic or almost none. Start several dl on several devices (phone laptop) (guess 2-3 is enough, maybe even one but not sure, not en expert after all ) then you should notice signifficant traffic on your phone, I guess!
So interesting I find this thread because I have the exact same problem!!!!
How I noticed it...when I am at home I drop 1% battery on Wifi per hour. 10hours = 10% (sometimes less).
I go to work on the Wifi, I DONT USE ANYTHING ON THE PHONE and the battery is DRAINING LIKE CRAZY!!! 5%/h or more!!!
( I am in airplane mode in both place)
So I was thinking, WTF with this work wifi, i am not doing anything at all on it. Then I look at my wifi icon I have a constant RECEIVE icon. And I bet my phone does not go to sleep or something.
So why in the world my work wifi is draining my battery and the one at home is not. I will check tonight but I dont think I have traffic like this. I am registering 5-6kbytes/s for nothing. The explanation given above is hands-waving. I do not agree with it fully. YEs sure there are several pings and beacon emitted back and forth but i do not think it is enough to cause 5-6kbytes/sec . The wifi is not in Monitor mode and it only receives the packets destined to my phone.
This is madness!!!! BTW When I had a different kernel on back on ICS this behavior stopped. I will try to monitor again.
kalinusa said:
So interesting I find this thread because I have the exact same problem!!!!
(...)
This is madness!!!! BTW When I had a different kernel on back on ICS this behavior stopped. I will try to monitor again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey kalinusa, did you find a solution to this problem?
I'm currently on the SpeedMod kernel, but that does not seem to make a difference to the 'office WiFi behavior' (so I keep my phone on mobile data).
I don't want to speak out of my ass, because I haven't a clue how the app works.
As far as I can guess SSH tunnel may help you. I would hope someone else could tell me I'm right, but I'm probably wrong.
I have had this same problem with two of my devices. The first is a Samsung Captivate with the last AOKP ICS build. The second is a Google Nexus 7 with AOKP's first Jelly Bean build (it happened when I had stock as well).
This only happens when I'm connected to WiFi at my university. The down arrow on the WiFi icon is ALWAYS on and it drains the battery. At home, I don't have these problems.
I emailed my university's IT department but I'm not sure if there's anything they can do. Anyone have any suggestions? Thanks.
I have exactly the same problem, but I think I found the reason which is causing it. I think that some of the routers are capable of the multicast over the wifi and then we can get a constant wifi traffic. I tested it at home, where I have enabled multicast over wifi and my phone wifi receiving the data all the time, even if it is in sleep. Now I'm in the office where we do not have such capable router with multicast over wifi and my phone wifi behavior is as expected. When I will be at home I will test it again with my router and with disabled multicast over wifi and hopefully it will solve this issue.
danielo said:
I have exactly the same problem, but I think I found the reason which is causing it. I think that some of the routers are capable of the multicast over the wifi and then we can get a constant wifi traffic. I tested it at home, where I have enabled multicast over wifi and my phone wifi receiving the data all the time, even if it is in sleep. Now I'm in the office where we do not have such capable router with multicast over wifi and my phone wifi behavior is as expected. When I will be at home I will test it again with my router and with disabled multicast over wifi and hopefully it will solve this issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More than multicasts it could be broadcasts, what are you reaceiving. For example if you don't use WINS server in Windows domain, all computers use broadcast to get IP address for a computer name (if you dont use DNS name, but that's another story). At home, where aren't many computers, there are very few broadcasts. But somewhere, where a large amount of computers is on the same network (not splitted to broadcast domais), number of broadcasts would dramatically increase
btw. if you connect a PC to the same network as your phone and stop ALL running applications (mainly instant messangers, web browsers, e-mail clients) you should see the same network bandwidth in use as on your cell phone.
More than multicasts it could be broadcasts, what are you reaceiving. For example if you don't use WINS server in Windows domain, all computers use broadcast to get IP address for a computer name (if you dont use DNS name, but that's another story). At home, where aren't many computers, there are very few broadcasts. But somewhere, where a large amount of computers is on the same network (not splitted to broadcast domais), number of broadcasts would dramatically increase
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting. Roughly how many devices would need to be on the same network, to see that kind of traffic load?
-- Sent from my TouchPad using Communities
post-mortem said:
Interesting. Roughly how many devices would need to be on the same network, to see that kind of traffic load?
-- Sent from my TouchPad using Communities
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It depends on what you consier as network load. If you start a network monitor like Wireshark or MS Network monitor and even if there is one computer on the network, you wil see "some" traffic (from time to time a few network packets). To generate constant network load, you'll need a few dozens of computers. And it always depends on how the network is designed and what applications the computers run. If all computers connect to a server, the network load will be a lot lower than if the computers share resources among them.
Or you can design your network in such way, that you divide computers into segments, where computers can communicate only with computers in its segment (or with some distant servers). This way the network load will dramatically decrease, as computers from different segments would not interfere.
I currently only have one computer connected to my home network atm via wifi, and it keeps a constant broadcast going to my phone for some unknown reason. I thought it was my dlna server, so I shut that off, and it is still broadcasting _something_... Its causing quite a battery drain, and unfortunately I cant seem to find the root of the issue. I've trolled through my router settings -- multicasting isnt on -- so Im at a loss. =\
Spz0 said:
I currently only have one computer connected to my home network atm via wifi, and it keeps a constant broadcast going to my phone for some unknown reason. I thought it was my dlna server, so I shut that off, and it is still broadcasting _something_... Its causing quite a battery drain, and unfortunately I cant seem to find the root of the issue. I've trolled through my router settings -- multicasting isnt on -- so Im at a loss. =\
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It can be caused also with the Media servers which runs on PC, also DHCP etc. It is not easy to eliminate all broadcast traffic and sadly our phones react at all that multicast packets.
My WiFi keeps disconnecting at random times i am running on a router/modem Belkin and comcast is my provider if that means anything,my xoom,netflix and ps3 are good.It's my old phones like droidx,samsung fasinate and bionic.All three phones are out of service but worked before when they were disconnected from verizion,it started this week.
Under wifi it will say scanning then obtaining ip address then connected to WLAN,then repeat all over again.
This is no big deal,and I have some time so I threw this question out there to try and figure it out.
THANKS
P.S.... I tried changing channels in router page,unplugged router and went back to my old settings.
Did you check the screen off settings? It's possible your MAC address of your phone has become blacklisted automatically by your router as well. Just a couple things to check.
can you tell me where i can find the mack address.thanks
The MAC Address can be found on Android phones in :
Parameters > About phone > Status
Right below your IP Address, you should have your MAC address.
.
this wont fix your router, but make sure your gateway from comcast has been bridged or else you're running a double NAT and will have sporadic DNS error when the comcast DNS servers have to outsource the lookup to other servers...
Have you set any static IPs? If so, make sure they don't fall in your DHCP range as this can cause IP conflicts. Also make sure you're close enough to your router to get a good signal.
It's also possible that you just have a crappy router. ISPs are notorious for giving out garbage.
ConfusingBoat said:
Have you set any static IPs? If so, make sure they don't fall in your DHCP range as this can cause IP conflicts. Also make sure you're close enough to your router to get a good signal.
It's also possible that you just have a crappy router. ISPs are notorious for giving out garbage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1, but he has a seperate Belkin... crap router... needs to get a highend Cisco, and bridge the gateway to prevent DNS issues...
DNS should never be a problem as long as you're not using the ones from your ISP. Use the Google public DNS (8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4) or some other reliable public DNS service. Years ago when I used the DNS servers from Qwest or Comcast my internet would randomly **** out every few days until I renewed my WAN DHCP.
Also, as far as routers go, I personally use a high-end Buffalo (cost me $80 new) loaded with DD-WRT and a NetGear WNDR-3700 with DD-WRT. Great routers, great firmware. If you have any reasonable amount of tech knowledge I would highly recommend using it.
Let me explain... I worked for Comcast for 2 years... He stated he is running a modem/belkin combo... That's not enough info to determine if he has two separate devices, or and all-in-one Gateway...
If he is using an all-in-one Gateway, and decides to use his own personal router, the Gateway MUST be placed into bridged mode, disabling it's built-in router. If that is not done, he is running a double NAT and will have sporadic DNS issues when the Comcast DNS servers cannot perform the lookup, and have to outsource them to another set of DNS servers...
And yes, Google DNS FTW
In any case it doesn't sound like a double-NAT issue as he said his other devices work fine, and any future double-NAT could be resolved by simply turning the wifi off on any applicable combination device (modem/router combo) and simply running any other routers in infrastructure (AP) mode. Either that or you could place the new router in a DMZ, effectively disabling NAT altogether without actually turning it off. There are many ways to skin a cat, especially in IT.
Btw I'm a developer / network admin at an information services company
ConfusingBoat said:
In any case it doesn't sound like a double-NAT issue as he said his other devices work fine, and any future double-NAT could be resolved by simply turning the wifi off on any applicable combination device (modem/router combo) and simply running any other routers in infrastructure (AP) mode. Either that or you could place the new router in a DMZ, effectively disabling NAT altogether without actually turning it off. There are many ways to skin a cat, especially in IT.
Btw I'm a developer / network admin at an information services company
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand, but having the ISP place it into bridged mode is easier... It's still unclear what equipment he has.
BTW, I don't care...
Quasimodem said:
I understand, but having the ISP place it into bridged mode is easier... It's still unclear what equipment he has.
BTW, I don't care...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure if you realize it, but your response seemed a little crude. My profession is every bit as relevant as you having worked for Comcast, and helps add credibility to my input regardless of whether or not you care.
Now, before this gets derailed into a geek-knowledge **** size contest...
If other wireless devices are working fine as the OP stated and all the affected devices are as small as a phone, it really starts to sound like a poor signal / interference issue. If the OP is in an older building, a building which utilizes dense materials or is full of anything else that may add to the signal attenuation, that could be part of the problem.
Another possible cause is that the DHCP pool isn't big enough to address all of the OP's devices. That's not to say there's not enough free addresses though, as the OP could just increase the pool size.
Or, again, it could just be that the router doesn't have the hardware to support as many devices as are trying to connect.
We really won't know until the OP replies with more information.
Quasimodem said:
this wont fix your router, but make sure your gateway from comcast has been bridged or else you're running a double NAT and will have sporadic DNS error when the comcast DNS servers have to outsource the lookup to other servers...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ConfusingBoat said:
I'm not sure if you realize it, but your response seemed a little crude. My profession is every bit as relevant as you having worked for Comcast, and helps add credibility to my input regardless of whether or not you care.
Now, before this gets derailed into a geek-knowledge **** size contest...
If other wireless devices are working fine as the OP stated and all the affected devices are as small as a phone, it really starts to sound like a poor signal / interference issue. If the OP is in an older building, a building which utilizes dense materials or is full of anything else that may add to the signal attenuation, that could be part of the problem.
Another possible cause is that the DHCP pool isn't big enough to address all of the OP's devices. That's not to say there's not enough free addresses though, as the OP could just increase the pool size.
Or, again, it could just be that the router doesn't have the hardware to support as many devices as are trying to connect.
We really won't know until the OP replies with more information.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you read my post above, you will see that his equipment is unknown, and i was providing a helpful tip if in fact he does have a gateway device.
Why in the world would you have him check all you mentioned when it's most likely easily fixable?
**** measuring? I think you just showed yours is smaller..
PS - I accidentally thanked you...
I was just throwing some ideas out there as food for thought because there's a lot that can affect a wireless connection, especially on devices as small as phones.
And my comment about "**** measuring" was thrown in solely because your responses come off rather condescending, especially when you begin with this:
Quasimodem said:
Let me explain... I worked for Comcast for 2 years...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry if I offended you somehow, and I'm sure you're actually a nice and helpful person, but you just come off as a know-it-all prick.
ConfusingBoat said:
I was just throwing some ideas out there as food for thought because there's a lot that can affect a wireless connection, especially on devices as small as phones.
And my comment about "**** measuring" was thrown in solely because your responses come off rather condescending, especially when you begin with this:
Sorry if I offended you somehow, and I'm sure you actually a nice and helpful person, but you just come off as a know-it-all prick.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's all good man, sometimes I'm like that... but we still don't know if he has a gateway device... from memory, belkin doesn't make gateways.... He just needs to optimize his router settings to WPA2-PSK and limit the radio to N only if that's all he's got... A gateway is a different animal and needs to be bridged... Uncheck avoid poor connections...
Why would it only be happening with the phones though, that's my main beef.
ConfusingBoat said:
Why would it only be happening with the phones though, that's my main beef.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cause it's a belkin... and uncheck avoid poor connecions...
I have had my new Galaxy Note 3 for about 3 weeks now, and have had an issue with certain apps not connecting to the internet over wifi. All of the google apps (youtube, play store, hangouts, gmail, etc) are not able to connect to the internet over any wifi hotspot, or if they do, they're painfully slow.
I have changed MTU settings on my home router, DNS settings, wifi auto switch is off on the phone.
Here's the kicker. If I enable airplane mode first, then turn wifi on, everything works great. I suspect this to somehow be related to the SIM card? Really should have nothing to do with wifi, but who knows...
I should add that I've owned a couple other android phones that have had this issue, but it seemed to have just "worked itself out" after a day or so. (Droid 4, Stratosphere II)
Have you tried a 30/30/30 hard reset on the router yet?
Does a laptop connected via Wi-Fi also have similar issues?
Sent from my SM-N900V using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
I have hard reset and factory reset the router a few times, even went so far as to buy a brand new router and use it. No difference.
I get 26/8 speeds on two different laptops, and one desktop, all with ping times down to about 18ms (as shown on speedtest.net)
spoke with a helpful rep at verizon today, who supposedly called samsung regarding this fix while I was on hold. My replacement should be here tomorrow. This issue is exactly the same as when older android phones would not connect to google (signal indicators would be white instead of blue). It seems like something to do with ssl traffic.
Anyhow, will post back after i've played with the replacement for a bit.
syntheticexctasy said:
I have hard reset and factory reset the router a few times, even went so far as to buy a brand new router and use it. No difference.
I get 26/8 speeds on two different laptops, and one desktop, all with ping times down to about 18ms (as shown on speedtest.net)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
syntheticexctasy said:
spoke with a helpful rep at verizon today, who supposedly called samsung regarding this fix while I was on hold. My replacement should be here tomorrow. This issue is exactly the same as when older android phones would not connect to google (signal indicators would be white instead of blue). It seems like something to do with ssl traffic.
Anyhow, will post back after i've played with the replacement for a bit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The next most common thing that it would be is the channel that your router is set to. You want to use a frequency that has little interference and there is an app called WiFi Analyzer to help figure it out for your surroundings.
The reason that the laptops might work ok is because the channel can be set within Windows and are most likely set to a different random number between 1-11 than your phone is.
I have found open channels and used those, which made no difference. I believe this may be a google issue as evidenced here (granted these guys are talking about the nexus 5, the issue is very much the same)
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/nexus/SN03aclu7B8[1-25-false]
I received my replacement today, no dice. I also bought a new router today, no dice. I've tried every channel 1-12, no dice.
The only thing that works is to enable airplane mode, then turn wifi on. I then see full speeds on play store, youtube, gmail, and hangouts. Interestingly enough, the facebook app is affected by this, as well as all push notifications.
It should be noted that the replacement note 3 exhibits the exact same behavior. This leads me to believe there is a modem issue causing the phone to switch back and forth between LTE and wifi, or something along those lines (if the cell radio is off, wifi works great)
syntheticexctasy said:
I received my replacement today, no dice. I also bought a new router today, no dice. I've tried every channel 1-12, no dice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
syntheticexctasy said:
The only thing that works is to enable airplane mode, then turn wifi on. I then see full speeds on play store, youtube, gmail, and hangouts. Interestingly enough, the facebook app is affected by this, as well as all push notifications.
It should be noted that the replacement note 3 exhibits the exact same behavior. This leads me to believe there is a modem issue causing the phone to switch back and forth between LTE and wifi, or something along those lines (if the cell radio is off, wifi works great)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is truly odd. I suppose it could be believable that an ISP throttled traffic to specific blocks (net neutrality anyone?), but I don't know why that would cause an interface change on the handset.
There are some apps which are network interface aware - e.g. as an example carriers will use split DNS and inbound IP firewalling so only people on their own network can resolve the IPs of MMS (APN) servers or *send* data to them. That prevents them from being DDOS'ed and I suppose other attacks from anything but their own network - which they have well instrumented. But that means that the MMS apps can not use whatever IP interface happens to be up - either for DNS service or for IP routing - so they need to be able to bring up a specific IP interface, use DNS that is bound through that interface, and route through that interface as well.
I was going through the apps on my phone the other night with a package browser (Package Explorer (Ribo), btw) and I was stunned at how many apps have "CHANGE_NETWORK_STATE" privileges.
What I'm wondering is if you have an app installed that has gone nuts and is toggling on/off your cell I/F. Something like that would be consistent with your observations.
Is there anything relevant happening in your device logcat when this is going on?
.
bftb0 said:
That is truly odd. I suppose it could be believable that an ISP throttled traffic to specific blocks (net neutrality anyone?), but I don't know why that would cause an interface change on the handset.
There are some apps which are network interface aware - e.g. as an example carriers will use split DNS and inbound IP firewalling so only people on their own network can resolve the IPs of MMS (APN) servers or *send* data to them. That prevents them from being DDOS'ed and I suppose other attacks from anything but their own network - which they have well instrumented. But that means that the MMS apps can not use whatever IP interface happens to be up - either for DNS service or for IP routing - so they need to be able to bring up a specific IP interface, use DNS that is bound through that interface, and route through that interface as well.
I was going through the apps on my phone the other night with a package browser (Package Explorer (Ribo), btw) and I was stunned at how many apps have "CHANGE_NETWORK_STATE" privileges.
What I'm wondering is if you have an app installed that has gone nuts and is toggling on/off your cell I/F. Something like that would be consistent with your observations.
Is there anything relevant happening in your device logcat when this is going on?
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are no apps installed other than the stock verizon/samsung apps. I have reset to factory in preparation for sending this unit back to vz, however it appears i'll be keeping it since the replacement didn't work any better.
Nothing interesting from logcat. Just a lot of IRListener messages, and DalvikVM occasionally clearing ram.
I can see why you would be pulling your hair out.
And the fact that you observe the same behavior with two different units (completely different hardware) and two different routers means one of two things:
- the problem is the handset/software
- the problem is not the handset/software.
Not trying to be funny there. What I mean by the above is that for you to pull two devices out of Samsung's production line at random (unless you happened to get two devices from a single batch of defective units), then the problem couldn't possibly be a low-probability defect thing: either it happens on a very large fraction of all N3 handsets, or the problem actually has nothing to do with the handset at all.
e.g. suppose Sammy shipped handsets where 1 out of 100 had the problem you observe. For you to end up with two of them in a row, the odds of that happening would be 1 in 10,000. If affected half of all handsets, then your odds would be more reasonable - 1 out of 4.
But it sure seems like if it affected half of all owners... or even 10% of all owners, people would be piling in in droves to complain.
I haven't noticed it on my N3, but I have other devices so I'm not sure how much I have used it for e.g. Youtube streaming. I do leave both WiFi and the cell on, and haven't noticed what is happening to you, but I am on MJ7 instead of MJE, and my WiFi is older (802.11g), so maybe if it is a bug it that wouldn't even show up with my setup even if it were the N3's fault.
(BTW, that offers a suggestion - because the N3 is so new it has 802.11ac capabilities - and I suppose your new router does too - if you turn off some capabilities, does the problem disappear? For instance turn off 802.11ac or 802.11n or 5Ghz band usage on the router, does that change anything?)
The other alternatives? Some kind of burst RF noise in your local environment? You earlier said
are not able to connect to the internet over any wifi hotspot, or if they do, they're painfully slow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
were the "any wifi hotspot" APs that were all relatively close to a single location, or were they widely dispersed (miles apart)? If they were miles apart, then the problem isn't ISM-band interference. Even if it were, interference from non 802.11 devices (bluetooth devices, baby monitors, microwaves, some wireless cameras, etc) isn't going to show up using a scanning app. Relatively sophisticated equipment would be needed to make that determination. Or a search and destroy mission.
I will say that I had a similar problem a few weeks back (using completely different gear) - I was tethering to a different Android phone (USB tether), and Web browsing on the client device (N7 tab) was fine except the Google Play store app - data would only come dribbling out of it. I couldn't even complete a single app listing, much less begin an app download. At the time I just chalked it up to a temporary problem with Google's Play store. But now it makes me wonder if it isn't something more subtle - as you noted, Google servers seem to be a commonality you are observing. Maybe some ridiculous bug involving Google's single credential efforts?
Well, now I'm rambling and I really haven't given you a suggestion. Maybe something I said will jog you in a different direction and you'll figure it out. If it really is something generic to the current Note 3, it seems like Google would want to know about it. I wonder if it is even possible to get telephone support from Google - they don't really have a reputation as being a consumer-oriented business.
good luck
.
Thank you for all of your help. I am sort of an amateur RF "enthusiast" myself. This happens in more than one location, literally every wifi location i've connected to.
I do believe on past handsets a new sim card sorted this out for some reason, however the vz rep that I spoke with activated a new one that I had gotten with the note 3, but not activated at the time, since my droid 4's sim card was "current enough".
I am lead to believe that this is a modem firmware issue, due to the fact that when the cell radio is off (doesn't matter if mobile data is on or off) the wifi works great. I am running MJE, and would be willing to try and downgrade to the previous radio to see if it makes a difference, but I don't know if that's even possible without causing some damage.
edit: I just realized that the replacement phone is running MJ7...so not sure it would matter.
Resolved
Ok guys, I figured this out, sort of.
I went into an angry router swapping/resetting frenzy when I figured out that the replacement acted the same.
My original setup consisted of: (I have a lot of wired devices in my house)
Comcast Gateway (set up as a normal cable modem, wifi/firewall/dhcp disabled) ----> Linksys WRT54G w/ DD-WRT (wifi off, using for firewall/routing) -----> Zonet N router (no dhcp, using as a switch, wifi off) --------> Linksys BEFW11S4 (used as a switch) ------> Netgear WNR1000V2 (used as a switch and second wifi access point occasionally)
During this frenzy, I eliminated the Zonet unit, and the BEFW11s4. My network now looks like this:
Comcast Gateway ----> Netgear WNR1000V2 (router/firewall/dhcp/wifi access point) -----> WRT54G (as a switch)
This seems to have solved my problem. I noticed while troubleshooting that if I disconnected the segment between the Zonet and the BEFW11S4, my phone would work perfectly fine. I believe that taking the BEFW11S4 out of the picture solved my problem, even though my data was not riding on that segment of the network.
Still, I am perplexed as to why the airplane mode trick fixed the issue.
LOL. I have a pile of Cisco routers if you want to buy them - and I'll throw in some token ring gear and another BEFW11S4 for free.
But seriously - you did the right thing by (experimentally) simplifying; the more complex an environment is, the more opportunities there are for bug expression.
Glad everything worked out - and I await your PM inquiring about my Cisco pile
I never wanted to upgrade from my WRT54G V1! What an awesome, rock solid router! However, need faster wireless speeds nowadays.
I was trying to keep that as my firewall, since the dd-wrt firewall is so much more robust than that of the netgear, also the netgear does not support nat loopback (something I really would like to have)
Please Share your feedback to help current and future owners of the router
The setup was super easy. Wifi range is much better than the Asus RT-AC66U it replaced. The standard Ethernet cable doesn't fit if you want to keep the outer cover on. The included cables are too short and the power cable is also too short. Otherwise it works well.
I don't like how some "unnamed devices" show up with no IP address in the list of connected devices... how is that even possible? I get if those devices are connected with a set static IP on the device, but if they are assigned via DHCP the IP address *should* show up (I have a LinksysPAP VoIP device set to DHCP that would not show the IP and just shows up as an unnamed device).
Other than that... great device so far, easy to set up. Love the app and the LED light on the top.
lexcyn said:
I don't like how some "unnamed devices" show up with no IP address in the list of connected devices... how is that even possible? I get if those devices are connected with a set static IP on the device, but if they are assigned via DHCP the IP address *should* show up (I have a LinksysPAP VoIP device set to DHCP that would not show the IP and just shows up as an unnamed device).
Other than that... great device so far, easy to set up. Love the app and the LED light on the top.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm still waiting for mine to arrive tomorrow. Do the "unnamed devices" at least show the mac address, so you can identify what they are? I've been curious about how much control I'd have over settings, ip, etc... I'm currently running a Buffalo router with DD-WRT.
adrman said:
I'm still waiting for mine to arrive tomorrow. Do the "unnamed devices" at least show the mac address, so you can identify what they are? I've been curious about how much control I'd have over settings, ip, etc... I'm currently running a Buffalo router with DD-WRT.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes they all at least show the MAC - but that's about it. You can set a static IP and forward ports... but not much else. It's a very simple interface, but I'm assuming it was built that way. I have a feeling as their app evolves they will add more control.
Can you guys post some screenshots ?
Here's a screenshot of the "unnamed device" I was talking about.
Not great here. I'm getting 1/3 of my speed on wifi and 1/10th hard wired compared to my linksys wrt-ac1900. Tech support was pretty responsive and are looking into it. I'm running gigabit fiber. The range seems decent and setup was easy.
Anyone to from a time capsule to this? Wondering if it would be worth the switch.
Unboxing and set up
http://youtu.be/MW8VeWdCo0I
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No way to add devices that use WPS (not a huge deal).
Security is not configurable (not a deal breaker, just interesting)
No web-based interface
No DDNS client (not a huge deal)
No way to view uPnP mappings
The single ethernet port in the back is kind of a drag, but it wasn't an issue for me. Also standard cables will not fit with the cover on.
The "unnamed device" thing is kind of annoying (makes setting up static DHCP entries a hassle) but it's not a huge deal. It would be cool to be able to name these explicitly from within the app.
Setup was easy and quick. Seems to work well, no drop-outs so far. :good:
With the mixed reviews out there, I wasn't expecting much in terms of coverage or perf, but I was pleasantly surprised. Since I live in a fairly large multi story house, I've always had to have range extenders to get upstairs (even with a high-end WAP downstairs). Now, for the first time ever in my house, I have only one WAP (OnHub) and I'm getting 25MB in the farthest reaches of the house. I get 80MB via wifi close to the router (in the same room), but that is similar to what I got before. I get 170MB via wired, so no problem keeping up with a high bandwidth connection, it seems to have plenty of processing power. I suppose putting the OnHub up on a shelf does help with range and perf compared to the old WAP being lower (beneath the TV), but I can't believe placement is making that big of a difference, it seems the range and perf of the OnHub is actually really good. So before where I had 4 wifi networks to deal with (wifi2G, wifi5G, wifi2GExt, wifi5GExt), it's all now just consolidated into one wifi network, which is great. I agree it is kind of a bummer that guest networking is not yet implemented, but I never used it, so not a big issue for me.
I really like being able to do the admin from the mobile app, the simplicity actually takes some getting used to. True, you can't configure security or frequencies (2G, 5G, channels, etc) that I know of, but I'm actually kind of starting to appreciate the simplicity, it is definitely a whole new take on a high-end router/WAP.
Only one LAN port on the OnHub is not really an issue for me because I had more than 4 wired devices (7 to be exact), so I already had an 8 port switch in use, which now (obviously) runs into the one LAN port on the OnHub.
So really my only (minor) issue with it is the standard cables are too short, and I wasn't sure if they were Cat 6, so I just swapped them for 10ft Cat 6 cables I already had; problem solved. I had no problem getting the cover to lock on with normal cables, which sounds different from what others are posting, not sure why, works fine for me.
So far no drops from interference, which was a problem on all my old routers/WAPs since I live in a neighborhood with lots of WAPs in range of my house.
Overall, I'm very happy with it, it has solved most (if not all) my home networking challenges, especially on the wifi side.
llarch said:
With the mixed reviews out there, I wasn't expecting much in terms of coverage or perf, but I was pleasantly surprised. Since I live in a fairly large multi story house, I've always had to have range extenders to get upstairs (even with a high-end WAP downstairs). Now, for the first time ever in my house, I have only one WAP (OnHub) and I'm getting 25MB in the farthest reaches of the house. I get 80MB via wifi close to the router (in the same room), but that is similar to what I got before. I get 170MB via wired, so no problem keeping up with a high bandwidth connection, it seems to have plenty of processing power. I suppose putting the OnHub up on a shelf does help with range and perf compared to the old WAP being lower (beneath the TV), but I can't believe placement is making that big of a difference, it seems the range and perf of the OnHub is actually really good. So before where I had 4 wifi networks to deal with (wifi2G, wifi5G, wifi2GExt, wifi5GExt), it's all now just consolidated into one wifi network, which is great. I agree it is kind of a bummer that guest networking is not yet implemented, but I never used it, so not a big issue for me.
I really like being able to do the admin from the mobile app, the simplicity actually takes some getting used to. True, you can't configure security or frequencies (2G, 5G, channels, etc) that I know of, but I'm actually kind of starting to appreciate the simplicity, it is definitely a whole new take on a high-end router/WAP.
Only one LAN port on the OnHub is not really an issue for me because I had more than 4 wired devices (7 to be exact), so I already had an 8 port switch in use, which now (obviously) runs into the one LAN port on the OnHub.
So really my only (minor) issue with it is the standard cables are too short, and I wasn't sure if they were Cat 6, so I just swapped them for 10ft Cat 6 cables I already had; problem solved. I had no problem getting the cover to lock on with normal cables, which sounds different from what others are posting, not sure why, works fine for me.
So far no drops from interference, which was a problem on all my old routers/WAPs since I live in a neighborhood with lots of WAPs in range of my house.
Overall, I'm very happy with it, it has solved most (if not all) my home networking challenges, especially on the wifi side.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exact experience I'm having with the Onhub.
Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk
The range is awesome. OnHub replaced a RT-66U and Amped AP300 with external powered antenna. My whole house is covered now.
I struggled through the unknown devices issues to get all my static IPs and port fwds setup.
The big issue for me is the OnHub does not support NAT Loopback. So you cannot access your cameras and static devices while at home without using their IP addresses. So my IP Camera app will not be able to find my cameras at home with "xxxx.duckdns.org:1025" but this works when connected to another network or Mobile data. This is a big pain in the a$$ for those of us that like to access things on our networks remotely and while at home.
I contacted support and they have added NAT Loopback to the requests...
A tip if replacing a FiOS router; power down the Verizon ONT for half an hour. Before powering back up, connect the ethernet from the ONT to the OnHub. The power cycle will force a renewed IP and allow the OnHub to register on the network without the need to go through the VZW router.
av8rdude said:
The range is awesome. OnHub replaced a RT-66U and Amped AP300 with external powered antenna. My whole house is covered now.
I struggled through the unknown devices issues to get all my static IPs and port fwds setup.
The big issue for me is the OnHub does not support NAT Loopback. So you cannot access your cameras and static devices while at home without using their IP addresses. So my IP Camera app will not be able to find my cameras at home with "xxxx.duckdns.org:1025" but this works when connected to another network or Mobile data. This is a big pain in the a$$ for those of us that like to access things on our networks remotely and while at home.
I contacted support and they have added NAT Loopback to the requests...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What camera app? If you're using TinyCam you can have internal (wifi) and external (LTE) settings for each camera.
I got mine today. I was using a borrowed modem and router so I needed to purchase something, and was either going to get a Ubiquiti access point (and keep using the borrowed router) or the onhub. So far it's been a great experience. Solid connections. I set a static address for my NAS.
It seems to be working well for me also. My biggest gripe is the "unnamed" devices. With 17 devices and only 3 or 4 that provide a recognizable name to OnHub, perhaps I could give them names?
The unnamed devices thing is very annoying.
Also, when assigning static ip, they need to list the mac address... Otherwise it makes it basically impossible to assign a static ip to one of those unnamed devices... Because which unnamed device are you assigning the ip to? Can't tell...
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
JasonJoel said:
The unnamed devices thing is very annoying.
Also, when assigning static ip, they need to list the mac address... Otherwise it makes it basically impossible to assign a static ip to one of those unnamed devices... Because which unnamed device are you assigning the ip to? Can't tell...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had a 30 minute conversation with support over just that issue. The general response was "well, that's a power user issue and this isn't a power user device" Even so, I'm surprised there hasn't been an update of some kind pushed yet because viewing the mac address to set a static ip isn't exactly "power user" functionality, it's basic.