cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Router woes - can't connect via hostname

3bears
Member

Been having awful problems with my 2701HGV.

 

I often cannot connect to computers via hostname. IP is fine. If I ping a hostname, it says:

 

Pinging hostname.gateway.2wire.net [10.213.251.226] with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.

 

The firewall logs then say:

 

src=192.168.1.73 dst=10.213.251.226 ipprot=6 sport=62887 dport=5900 Traffic from home to VAP2 network dropped

 

The hostname is 192.168.1.71.

 

Can someone help?

5 REPLIES 5

nikkil
Power User

This is a DNS issue. On your PC, what is the DNS server set? 

 

You can try digging from there on why the DNS server was not able to resolve the host's IP. Good luck.Smiley Wink

3bears
Member

The DNS server? It's 192.168.1.254 - the router - this is local lan I'm talking about. This stuff should just all work via dchp, no?

 

Anyway, it's working again now. Just wish it would stop working for several hours every few days.

3bears
Member

Now that it is now working, here is the ping:


Pinging hostname.gateway.2wire.net [192.168.1.71] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 192.168.1.71: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128

 

This is what it should always look like.

 

Why was it pointing to 10.213.251.226 when it was not working. What is 10.213.251.226?!

nayan007
Super User

For this DNS issueand for a permenant solution please get in touch with technical support team

 

tfc
Member

I think this problem is caused by the buggy DNS software in the 2700 and 2701. I have seen incorrect entries appear regularly. The software seems to get into a complete mess when a connection is made on the BT Openzone subnet. The connecting entity sometimes appears in the DNS table (with an address in the local network) or alternatively, a computer in the local network has its entry corrupted with a wrong IP address. Funnily enough NetBios seems to be able to ignore the nonsense, and works OK, but anything relying on the 2700 HGV can get screwed up.

 

I raised this previously in a different (security) context. Sad to say, no-one, but no-one from BT picked up on this issue. See here