DJMartin wrote:I do not understand where you feel I was disrespectful to employees or others.
I'm guessing the comments along the lines of "Please reread my post and understand what it says.", and others. Pretty abrasive, and well ... not at all a good way to get people to want to help you.
DJMartin wrote:
A bit about me. I spent twenty plus years working in avionics, specifically with LASERS, RADAR, Infra-red, data acquisition systems and system integration on fighter aircraft while serving in the US Air Force. This also required extensive use of computers, test equipment and so forth.
That's all well and good. In my experience though, when someone feels the need to add their credentials to a conversation (unless specifically asked) amounts to nothing more than trying to demand respect (or fluffing themselves up), and then typically results in them rather amusingly being put in their place.
DJMartin wrote:
Therefore I find it is the persons' responsibility, regardless of their position, to take the time to read and comprehend what is presented to them. If they have questions, they are expected to ask - to better their understanding. That being said, the information required to properly use, configure and implement a device should be readily and fully available, and not have to be culled from, over one hundred twenty one thousand messages, sift through data which pertains to old versions or is non existent to the user base (CLI commands).
Given the responses, and it taking us several posts to get information out of you (e.g. the use of a /24 vs. a /8 or something else), most of the responses have been forced to be made on the little good information you actually gave us.
As for the "old versions" -- the new ones simply add more, web UI / CLI commands are the same though (plus some new ones).
Not sure what you mean about the "CLI being non-existant to the userbase". You will find that many of us here use it. This isn't some soho router where "oh yeah, there's a CLI if you're a super-nerd" ... but rather a more professional-oriented router, where the CLI is typically the main method for interacting with it.
DJMartin wrote:
The NetGear was replaced with the ER-X, the network powered up, and that is when the problems began, with devices not acquiring an IP from the ER-X. Devices were powered down, electrical power removed and reapplied and the device restarted, and still the device would not acquire an IP from the ER-X. Yes time was provided for capacitors to lose their charge before reapplying electrical power.
Note all devices on the LAN are set to acquire an IP from the sole DHCP server, the devices are set to not have a manually assigned internal IP, they are to acquire their IP from the sole DHCP server of the LAN.
Troubleshooting ensued. Replaced network cables with known good operational cables. Still no IP acquired on devices that would not acquire an IP. All network cables were then checked with a network cable tester and all checked good.
The network was powered down as above, the ER-X removed and the NetGear installed, the network powered up, and all devices acquired their IP and worked normally.
Two likely scenarios:
- The devices for whatever reason were "locked" to the Netgear's mac address (or perhaps your switch only allowed the netgear's mac address to respond to DHCP)
- User error and you set up the ER to have a different address on the LAN side than 10.x.x.1/24 (or whatever you had defined as the main router for the subnet).
DJMartin wrote:
This is an immediate and clear indicator the ER-X was and or is at fault in some manner.
Or user error, as mentioned above. But without a config file, we can't really say.
Given that you're the only person in my recollection who's had "problems with DHCP" (and nothing more substantial than "stories" to back it up), I'm leaning towards that.
DJMartin wrote:
The ER-X was reset with the reset button. Restarted and once again set by the wizard to the Basic configuration.
At no time was a configuration restored from the the first attempt at configuration, this was to preclude any errors that may have been made by me while editing the configuration file in a text editor.
The DHCP server was once more set to the 10.x.x.x/24 subnet, some of the devices were assigned their static IP mappings and others were not.
Unfortunately, as above, this does nothing to disprove user error (e.g. the LAN interface was set to 192.168.1.1/24, or some other subnet that didn't match "10.x.x.x" that you keep putting)