MacInTouch Amazon link...
Channels
Products, Questions


One other issue with Synology units: the Spotlight search doesn't return everything - it’s capped at something like 2000 records. Depending on usage, that may not be a problem, but it can be for filtered searches, or when you are trying to find file types etc. If Synology would have a connector for Open Directory I would be 100% sold.
Search is a major concern for us. We have literally millions of files, and the search is not great. It seems better with AFP than SMB, but neither is fast.

Searching with File Station on the NAS is reasonably fast but just leaves you with a list of files in the browser and no way to directlly access them. Eg: we can't search for a photo and simply drag it into InDesign. We need to find the file, make a note of the path and then physically find it with the Finder etc.

As to Open Directory, you can connect to an Open Directory server. We did this the first week we had the device, but as we're not sure if OD will survive, it didn't make sense to rely on it. Unfortunately there was no way to import the OD users into the NAS, so we created all new users. On a positive note, when we created the standalone synced server last week, we were able to take the backup configuration file and import it into our freshly-created NAS. In the import step you can specify just Users, if that's all you need.
 


I use a Mac Mini with 256 Gig Apple SSD with two Thunderbolt 2 ports and USB ports. I run Sierra and Apple server.
This sounds very similar to what we have. We use SyncPro instead of Time Machine, but other than that, we have a similarly long-standing, reliable system juggling Mac Minis, Thunderbay RAIDs (SoftRAID) and Carbon Copy Cloner.

We probably go a step further with additional backup servers and offsite RAID units, but it has worked remarkably well. The Mac Minis are 'Late 2012' models and show no signs of stopping.
 


I manage a small creative team with ten iMacs, all running macOS 10.13.6, and we've set up File Sharing on one of our Macs as a central repository of shared files and resources. Lately, however, File Sharing seems to crash for no apparent cause. Other machines either can't see the shared volume at all, or they can see the file listing, but all the files and folders (1.5TB) appear to contain zero MB. Restarting the host machine works some of the time, but not consistently. And then, just as suddenly as File Sharing stops working, it'll go back to normal.
Is the shared volume of files on a drive that is internal the 'central' iMac or is this an external drive? The size of the shared space seems to indicate it is a hard drive, so the file system is probably HFS+ even though running macOS 10.13.6. If trying to share APFS, then that could be problematic.

Is the host using the same drive for the local user work while being shared out to others? (i.e., the host also has a user sitting at the machine)?

If your clients are using the general File Sharing user interface with macOS 10.13.6, they'll try to connect with SMB first but can automagically fall back to AFP. The "advanced options" box on the server should be able to enumerate how many of each protocol are connected.

The same volume being shared "out" via different protocols shouldn't be a problem, but how the clients are using them could present an issue.

if the file size on the server is not zero, but zero on the client, then I'd suspect the cache on the client as being a likely issue, and rebooting the server could have no impact at all upon that (e.g., the client thinks its cache is 'just fine' and doesn't refresh even if you reboot the server). If the files 'zero out' on the server, then you have a file system problem. In that case, turn off file sharing, reboot, then run "First Aid" on the volume being served. (If serving off of a boot drive - not recommended - then you should boot into recovery mode and run Disk First Aid on your boot volume while not booted on it.)

If the clients have 'bad' cache symptoms, then ejecting/disconnecting from the server and reconnecting could be tried. If clients automagically mount at boot, then I could see drift between clients and server presenting with these symptoms. (It isn't supposed to happen, but there could be another contributing factor just not illuminated yet. )

Finally, if there is a heavy load on the server, you might need to tweak the baseline system parameters of the server system. Turn on performance mode even though not technically running macOS Server.
 


Search is a major concern for us. We have literally millions of files, and the search is not great. It seems better with AFP than SMB, but neither is fast. Searching with File Station on the NAS is reasonably fast but just leaves you with a list of files in the browser and no way to directlly access them. Eg: we can't search for a photo and simply drag it into InDesign. We need to find the file, make a note of the path and then physically find it with the Finder etc.
Have you tried using the Search feature available in InDesign's (or Adobe Illustrator’s) Place window? You're required to know the file name, but I assume you would for any other Search operation. Since you've already invoked the Place command, once Search locates the photo, you just select it and complete the command.

By the way, drag and drop is not the best way to Place images, graphics, or text. Command-D is better, and you get some very useful options this way.
 


Have you tried using the Search feature available in InDesign's (or Adobe Illustrator’s) Place window? You're required to know the file name, but I assume you would for any other Search operation. Since you've already invoked the Place command, once Search locates the photo, you just select it and complete the command.
By the way, drag and drop is not the best way to Place images, graphics, or text. Command-D is better, and you get some very useful options this way.
I'm fairly certain the search window in the InDesign Place dialog uses the system's search engine, so there's no advantage - it would simply be leveraging Spotlight, which is still proving slow.

As to using the Place command rather than drag and drop, I don't agree that the Place command is better. Yes, it offers different options for certain file types, but in most of our situations, drag and drop is perfectly adequate and quite a bit faster.

FWIW, I still use Command-E (the Quark commands). I still fight with my staff about this, as half use the InDesign commands, and we older folk use the Quark commands.
 


I am considering the purchase of a Toshiba FlashAir 16GB SD card, which will theoretically allow for wireless transfer of data from my ResMed AirSense 10 CPAP machine to my wireless network to my computer for input into the SleepyHead software. If this works, this will relieve me of having to physically remove the SD card from the CPAP machine and manually load the data into the computer via card reader.

So far I have found two Java programs that purport to connect to the FlashAir card: SleepMaster and FlashPAP. Both look daunting to configure. The SD card appears to have a fixed 198.xxx.x.xx IP address; if so, how will I connect it to my 10.xxx.x.xx network?

Between the two Java software programs above and the actual FlashAir hardware, there are numerous reviews by people saying they couldn't get the setup to work or it worked, but then quit working a month later.

Does anyone in the MacInTouch community have experience with this software or hardware? Or have any other suggestions for getting the data off the machine and into my computer?
 


OK, yet another twist on my attempts to get a wireless SD card to connect to my home network.

I recently purchased a TP-Link Archer T9E PCI card to add wireless capabilities to my 2009 Mac Pro (firmware upgraded to 2010). I have been using my lovely bride's MacBook Pro for it's wireless capabilities, but she uses it a lot and it's out of the house most days of the week, so it's been inconvenient.

While the card works fabulously in my Mac Pro on the 5GHz band of my home network (tall Airport Extreme wireless router), it won't connect to the 2.4GHz band of my router and, of course, that is a band that I need. Via the Network control panel, it sees the 2.4GHz band (and the app WiFi Explorer confirms the band is there, but after attempting to connect, a few seconds of waiting returns the error message "cannot connect to network". No asking for password, just that it can't connect.

The old Powerbook will connect just fine. While the 2011 MacBook Pro and two iPhone 7s usually connect via 5GHz band, all three will connect fine to the 2.4GHz band.

I have moved the card to a different PCI slot in the Mac, with no difference in results.

This is a card that is manufacturer-supported for Windows only, so I haven't contacted them. It is the top recommended card at TonyMac's Hackintosh site and the card supposedly works right out of the box.

Short of returning the card to the eBay seller (especially since I still suspect that the problem is something on my end and not specifically with the card itself), I can't think of anything else to try to get this to work.

Requesting any and all tips or advice as to what to try next.
 



The Asus AC card (PCE-AC68) worked well for me, and at AC speeds, to boot. Plus the antenna had extension cords, so you could place it high even if the machine was down low.

You could also look at a WiFi extender with an Ethernet port: it would connect to the WiFi and give your machine a wired Ethernet link. I think even Apple’s Airport Express units could do that.
 


Here's one that is supposed to be Mac compatible:
I ended up purchasing one of the same brand, but a bit higher up the food chain:

A quick note for others: the installation of the driver takes an extra step not noted in the instructions.

The macOS 10.6 to 10.14 driver installer (available on the EDUP website) puts an application named “StatusBarApp.app” on the hard drive in ~Library/Application Support/WLAN. This is the application that puts the icon in the upper-right menu bar that allows for configuration of the EDUP USB WiFi unit.

Unfortunately, the installer does not activate this application, so one gets no icon in the menu bar. Double-clicking on the StatusBarApp application places the icon in my menu bar, and the WiFi unit can now configured.

I don’t know if there is something specific to my setup that blocks the automatic activation of the StatusBarApp or if most or all people running macOS 10.14.x (and possibly earlier) will have this non-activation problem.

Anyway, my Mac Pro 2009 can now connect to my AirPort Extreme (tall) wireless router on the 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands.
 


I want to ask for advice on setting up a failover system from my DSL modem to a cellular carrier at my house in Mexico.

I have a (Telmex) DSL line that provides 3Mb/s down and 0.3 Mb/s up with pings to 8.8.8.8 of around 125 ms. Theft of the copper trunk cables along the highway has always been a problem, and now I and my community are often without phone or DSL service for 10-15 days per month. My iPhone 6 can get 10 Mb/s down, 1Mb/s up via LTE/3G to a Telcel tower about 2 miles away.

I have seen this Netgear LB2120 LTE modem/router on Amazon that looks like it might do what I want. Probably, I would have to add an external MIMO antenna with 5 meters of extension cables - any recommendations? A Telcel plan with 10GB monthly would cost me around $20 USD/month with fallback to 2 Mb/s if I exceed the data limit. I could live with that. While the LB2120 gets decent reviews on Amazon, the technical support available from Netgear seems to be very poor.

My existing Huawei DSL modem distributes 192.168.1.x addresses and I use DynDns plus port forwarding to my house Mac Mini 2007 (Mac OS X 10.6.8) so I can have remote access to certain (weather, security) applications on the Mini.

I assume that I would put the DSL modem into bridge mode to the LB2120 and use that device for my DHCP server. Since the Netgear distributes 192.168.5.X addresses, I guess I would also have to reconfigure all the devices that now have 192.168.1.X static addresses to the 5.X network.

Can anyone comment on how well such a setup would work and any other things I should know, or provide alternative means of doing what I want to accomplish at a cost of under around $300?
 


I want to ask for advice on setting up a failover system from my DSL modem to a cellular carrier at my house in Mexico.

I have a (Telmex) DSL line that provides 3Mb/s down and 0.3 Mb/s up with pings to 8.8.8.8 of around 125 ms. Theft of the copper trunk cables along the highway has always been a problem, and now I and my community are often without phone or DSL service for 10-15 days per month. My iPhone 6 can get 10 Mb/s down, 1Mb/s up via LTE/3G to a Telcel tower about 2 miles away.

I have seen this Netgear LB2120 LTE modem/router on Amazon that looks like it might do what I want. Probably, I would have to add an external MIMO antenna with 5 meters of extension cables - any recommendations? A Telcel plan with 10GB monthly would cost me around $20 USD/month with fallback to 2 Mb/s if I exceed the data limit. I could live with that. While the LB2120 gets decent reviews on Amazon, the technical support available from Netgear seems to be very poor.

My existing Huawei DSL modem distributes 192.168.1.x addresses and I use DynDns plus port forwarding to my house Mac Mini 2007 (Mac OS X 10.6.8) so I can have remote access to certain (weather, security) applications on the Mini.

I assume that I would put the DSL modem into bridge mode to the LB2120 and use that device for my DHCP server. Since the Netgear distributes 192.168.5.X addresses, I guess I would also have to reconfigure all the devices that now have 192.168.1.X static addresses to the 5.X network.

Can anyone comment on how well such a setup would work and any other things I should know, or provide alternative means of doing what I want to accomplish at a cost of under around $300?
I have had good luck with these:

You can get one for around $350

You can pay extra and cloud-manage it remotely, but for most people I just set to local management.

I have set these up for people with DSL and people with cable modems to auto-failover when those go down.
 


I have a (Telmex) DSL line that provides 3Mb/s down and 0.3 Mb/s up with pings to 8.8.8.8 of around 125 ms. Theft of the copper trunk cables along the highway has always been a problem, and now I and my community are often without phone or DSL service for 10-15 days per month. My iPhone 6 can get 10 Mb/s down, 1Mb/s up via LTE/3G to a Telcel tower about 2 miles away.

I have seen this Netgear LB2120 LTE modem/router on Amazon that looks like it might do what I want. Probably, I would have to add an external MIMO antenna with 5 meters of extension cables - any recommendations? A Telcel plan with 10GB monthly would cost me around $20 USD/month with fallback to 2 Mb/s if I exceed the data limit. I could live with that. While the LB2120 gets decent reviews on Amazon, the technical support available from Netgear seems to be very poor.

My existing Huawei DSL modem distributes 192.168.1.x addresses and I use DynDns plus port forwarding to my house Mac Mini 2007 (Mac OS X 10.6.8) so I can have remote access to certain (weather, security) applications on the Mini.

I assume that I would put the DSL modem into bridge mode to the LB2120 and use that device for my DHCP server. Since the Netgear distributes 192.168.5.X addresses, I guess I would also have to reconfigure all the devices that now have 192.168.1.X static addresses to the 5.X network.

Can anyone comment on how well such a setup would work and any other things I should know, or provide alternative means of doing what I want to accomplish at a cost of under around $300?
Since this set-up sounds like an important one to your quality of life I'd suggest increasing the budget a bit.

Looking at functionality (a router with cellular and wired WAN, failover and local LAN management) and technical support, I'd recommend a look at Peplink's MAX BR1 product line - Pepwave MAX industrial 4G Routers. We've had good experience with these in remote areas (e.g., the mountains of California) where we need to mix various communication options (in our case satellite and cellular). The systems are quite robust (made for mobile platforms such as trains, trucks and yachts), provide multi-WAN load balancing and fail-overs and a rich repertory of traffic management and security options (which you don't have to exercise :-)).

Aside from the technology, as such, where we have been particularly impressed is with their technical support. Their support staff actually participates in the customer online forum, and provides very individualized troubleshooting tips and solutions. We've had them troubleshoot systems well after the warranty period has expired, something we have not seen any other device organization provide to individual (as well as large corporate) users.

For your needs, I expect a MAX BR1 mini with a WAN license (to add wired WAN) would be suitable. MAX Single Cellular Mobile Router - BR1. It would run to $299 + $100 (for the WAN port license).

For antennas, we've had good luck with MobileMark panel MIMO antennas (PND10-700/2700) (expensive), and people speak well of Poynting XPOL MIMO antennas (4G LTE MiMo Archives) (less expensive).

If you have a cable run of any length, make absolutely sure you deploy high-quality coax cable - the signal loss in the cable can really kill your system if you go for the low-quality stuff.
 


I recently bought a new MacBook Pro (15-inch, 2018) to replace my Mac Mini (mid-2010), and for some reason I haven’t been able to connect the new MacBook Pro to my modem-router (Netgear C6300). The Mac Mini still connects OK; so does my wife’s MacBook Pro (late-2013). But when I try to connect the new MacBook Pro to the primary network (either 5GHz or 2.4GHz), I immediately get an error message “The Wi-Fi network [name] could not be joined.”

However, I can connect the new MacBook Pro to the “guest network,” so my first thought was that it must be an access problem. But selecting the router’s option to “Allow all new devices to connect” didn’t help, and neither did turning off Access Control altogether. (Neither did rebooting the router.)

I’ve reviewed every relevant setting or preference I could find on both the router and the new MacBook Pro, but didn’t find any solution. I also checked the router’s firmware, which seems to be up to date.

I suspect the trouble has something to do with the router, rather than with the MacBook Pro, because I’ve also been unable to connect to the router from a newly purchased printer. Like the new MacBook Pro, the new printer will connect only to the guest network, not to the primary network.

But even if the router really is the problem, I don’t know what more I could do to fix it. I’m thinking my next step might be just to buy a different/newer modem-router, and see what happens. Does that make sense? Any other suggestions or comments?
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
I recently bought a new MacBook Pro (15-inch, 2018) to replace my Mac Mini (mid-2010), and for some reason I haven’t been able to connect the new MacBook Pro to my modem-router (Netgear C6300). The Mac Mini still connects OK; so does my wife’s MacBook Pro (late-2013). But when I try to connect the new MacBook Pro to the primary network (either 5GHz or 2.4GHz), I immediately get an error message “The Wi-Fi network [name] could not be joined.”
I had a similar experience a while back. I could connect with two different FiOS routers in two different homes but not to a third one, in between, even though another MacBook Pro in the same house was using it, and I had the right password, etc. I couldn't figure out and ran out of time, very frustrated, because it made no sense. In retrospect, I wonder if the problem may have been that two of the routers may have been close enough to both make contact with my MacBook Pro at the same time?

All that aside and possibly irrelevant, here are a few things I just found with a search:
 


However, I can connect the new MacBook Pro to the “guest network,” so my first thought was that it must be an access problem. But selecting the router’s option to “Allow all new devices to connect” didn’t help, and neither did turning off Access Control altogether. (Neither did rebooting the router.)
I had a similar problem with a Neato D7 vacuuming robot. I use an Apple Extreme base station (the tall one w/o a built-in drive). It refused to connect to either the 2.4 or 5 GHz networks but would immediately connect to the guest network even though it was also password-protected. Never figured out what was going on. All of the many other devices we use can connect to all three networks.
 


I recently bought a new MacBook Pro (15-inch, 2018) to replace my Mac Mini (mid-2010), and for some reason I haven’t been able to connect the new MacBook Pro to my modem-router (Netgear C6300). The Mac Mini still connects OK; so does my wife’s MacBook Pro (late-2013). But when I try to connect the new MacBook Pro to the primary network (either 5GHz or 2.4GHz), I immediately get an error message “The Wi-Fi network [name] could not be joined.”
I had a similar odd experience when I bought a MacBook Air last year and migrated some data from my Mac Mini to it. The MacBook Air would not connect properly to my network, and when I eventually called Apple, they said I should change my user name on the MacBook Air to something different than I have on the Mini. Once I did that, I was able to connect both to the network simultaneously.

It's something I had never experienced before, and it's kind of annoying not to have the same user name on all the machines I use.
 


Now that 5G is slowly appearing I wonder if a 5G hot-spot device and/or 5G modem will appear to connect older devices to 5G via WiFi. Can the benefits of 5G be maintained?
 



The Ubiquiti series of gateways/routers can act as an inexpensive failover device, also. The UI is not the easiest to follow, but the wizard will walk you through the process of setting up a dual WAN (shared, failover, etc.) gateway.

I'd recommend the use of a single gateway to handle both data feeds for the simple reason that all sorts of unhappiness can result due to misconfigurations. Also, it helps ensure that your security settings on your firewall are consistent.

Unfortunately, I have yet to find a good second candidate for my WAN interfaces, so one lies fallow while the other "enjoys" comcastic performances.
 


I did notice that, when I plugged it in, it (and my wired printer) downgraded the RT2600ac's ports to Fast Ethenet (orange LED). Not unexpected, but being mildly paranoid about the speed of my LAN, I put them both behind an old gigabit switch I had lying around and, voila, all (including the switch) went green for gigabit. Go figure, and probably unnecessary but...
Ugh, Horribly bad design.

In order to explain why, let me present some technical background. Those who already know the terminology can just skip to the end.
There are four different ways of connecting Ethernet devices to each other - shared-bus, repeater, bridge or router. Every device that aggregates Ethernet ports for any reason implements one or more of these, even if they are marketed using other non-standard names (like "switch" or "hub").​
A shared bus network is what was used in the old days, when 10BASE5 ("thick" Ethernet) and 10BASE2 ("thin" Ethernet) were used. There is one long cable that connects to multiple computers, either through use of a vampire tap (typical for 10BASE5) or T-connectors (typical for 10BASE2). Shared bus Ethernet works using a mechanism (CSMA/CD) where a computer listens to all data on the wire and only transmits when nobody else is transmitting, along with protocols to detect and deal with the situation when two try to transmit at the same time ("collisions").​
By its nature, shared-bus networks can only run at one speed (e.g. 10BASE5 and 10BASE2 Ethernet can only run at 10Mbit/s).​
Repeaters were originally invented in order to extend the range of shared-bus networks. A repeater is a dumb device that simply transmits whatever it receives on one port to all the other ports. They can also be used to create branches in a shared-bus network (tree-like topologies instead of straight line). Because repeaters work at the lowest level of electrical signals, all ports must run at the same speed. They are logically no different from a shared-bus network - only one device can transmit at a time and CSMA/CD protocol is used to detect and minimize collisions.​
When Ethernet started to use twisted-pair cabling (10BASE-T and later 100BASE-TX), the standard way to connect devices to the network was through the use of repeaters - one port per host. Just like when repeaters are used to join lengths of shared-bus cabling, repeaters when used with twisted-pair cabling must also be single-speed. A 10BASE-T repeater is 10M only and a 100BASE-T repeater is 100M only.​
These repeaters are often sold as "hubs", but "hub" is not a technical term and can refer to many other kinds of devices as well.​
There were once sold (and might even still be) so-called "dual speed" hubs. Assuming they are based on repeaters (never certain, because "hub" is not a technical term), these devices consist of two repeaters - one at 10M and one at 100M - with a 2-port bridge (see below) connected between them. Ports are dynamically attached to one of the two repeaters depending on the speed of the device attached to the port.​
The problem with repeaters (in addition to being single-speed) is that they don't let networks scale to large sizes. As the number of devices increases, the number of collisions increases, because only one can transmit at a time.​
Bridges were invented to solve this problem. Instead of repeating the electrical signals, they have a chip that actually receives each packet, determines which port should be used to reach its destination, and transmits it on that port. At the lowest layers (where the CSMA/CD protocol runs), all the ports are isolated from each other, which means devices attached to two different ports can transmit at the same time without any collisions.​
Bridges do this using "MAC address learning", where they read the source MAC address of every packet and associate the address with the port the packet was received on. Afterwards, packets destined for that address will only be transmitted on that port. Traffic where the destination MAC address is unknown gets "flooded" (transmitted on all ports). Traffic destined for the Ethernet broadcast address (FF:FF:FF:FF:FF:FF) is also flooded.​
In bridges, the chip performing the packet processing has a memory buffer to store packets (since there's no guarantee that the packet's egress port will be available for immediate transmission. Because of this buffering, there is no requirement for all ports to run at the same speed. There can be a full mix of 10M, 100M and faster ports and even electrically-incompatible media (e.g. fiber optic).​
More advanced bridges include processors that run protocols (e.g. Spanning Tree) to detect loops in the network. They may also snoop on IGMP (the IP multicast control protocol) in order to intelligently handle multicast Ethernet packets. They may have other advanced features, like virtual Ethernet networks (VLANs) and quality of service (to prioritize some traffic over other traffic). These advanced bridges usually support management where an administrator can log-in to it for the purpose of configuring and monitoring its features.​
These days, bridges are often sold as "switches", but that is not an accurate term. "Switch" implies circuit-switching (like a crossbar switch or an ATM switch), which is not the case for most Ethernet networks. But that hasn't stopped companies from using the term for devices that technically should be called "bridges" or where the primary function is to move packets the way bridges do.​
Although bridges have a separate CSMA/CD "collision space" for each port, all ports are part of a single "broadcast domain", which means that large networks based entirely on bridges can encounter bandwidth problems in the presence of protocols that use a lot of broadcast traffic (e.g. many early Apple and Microsoft file-sharing protocols).​
Routers solve this problem. Each router port is a separate broadcast domain, and Ethernet packets are not forwarded between the ports. Instead, higher-level packet data (e.g. IPv4 or IPv6 addresses) is read and used to make forwarding decisions. When a router forwards a packet, the Ethernet encapsulation of the packet is removed, and a new Ethernet encapsulation is created before it is transmitted on the egress port. Routers may alter the packets in other ways, as well (e.g. decrementing a TTL value or IPv4 fragmentation).​
Routers are always used to forward packets between networks (e.g. corporations, service providers, home LANs, etc.) They are often used within large networks for a variety of different reasons, including minimization of internal broadcast traffic and internal firewall/security operations.​
These days, it is rare to find a device that is strictly a router. Most of the time, routers include bridge capabilities as well. You typically configure a group of ports (sometimes called a "bridge group") such that traffic is bridged between those ports. You then configure it to route traffic between the bridge groups.​
It is common these days for bridge/router devices like these to be sold as "switches" in order to emphasize their bridging capabilities (which may be the product's primary focus). This can become very confusing, because the term "switch" is also used to market bridge-only devices, including simple unmanaged bridges.​

"The End" I suggested you can skip to

Getting back to the original subject, most consumer Internet gateway routers (the kinds typically provided by an ISP or purchased in retail stores for residential and small business use) are typically simple hybrid bridge/router devices.

These products have two logical devices - a router and a bridge. While they may both be on a single chip, they behave as two separate connected devices. The router device typically has only two ports - a WAN port and a LAN port. The WAN port connects to your service provider's access network (cable modem, DSL modem, etc.) or an Ethernet port that you are expected to connect to your service provider's access device. The LAN port connects to the bridge.

All of the other ports you see (Ethernet and Wi-Fi, typically) connect to the bridge.

(BTW, this is why disabling the router capabilities is called putting it into "bridge mode". In this mode, the WAN port is directly connected to the bridge and the router does nothing.)

If you have a consumer router that forces all of the Ethernet ports to run at the same speed, then it is quite likely that the manufacturer is using a chip that connects all the Ethernet ports via a repeater instead of a bridge. This was clearly a cost-cutting decision, but I would consider it a very bad design. A chip with a bridge shouldn't cost much more and it makes the product much more useful (since the ports can run at different speeds.)

The workaround is pretty simple. Buy your own Ethernet bridge and attach it to one of your router's LAN ports. Then plug all your devices into the bridge. Simple bridges with Gigabit speeds are not very expensive. Some examples: 5-port ($20), 8-port ($42), 16-port ($68).
 


I have a vexing issue that started a couple of days ago. My new Mac Mini no longer can connect to my wireless router, on either of its networks. I get asked for the password, but it always fails. It can connect to the Comcast wireless unit right beside my router. I would think it is a router issue, but my iPad and old Mac Mini and MacBook Air all connect to my router without any trouble, from farther away than my new computer.

I updated new firmware on the router - didn't help (I didn't think it would). I told my Mac to forget the network and then added it back in, didn't help. I ran ethernet cable across the floor to the router, which is what I am now using but not something to leave in place for long. Any suggestions on what to try next?
 



I have a vexing issue that started a couple of days ago. My new Mac Mini no longer can connect to my wireless router, on either of its networks. I get asked for the password, but it always fails
Hi, Kopernicus; this seems to be a problem I had a couple of years ago. Turns out that the new device was using the same internal IP address (from the WiFi network) as one of the older devices. What I ended up doing was to power-cycle the Airport Extreme Base Station. The new device was then given its own IP address, and everything turned out to be fine.
 


Maybe hopping back just a bit in this thread for previous discussion about the same problem?
I had looked at the earlier posts, but I couldn't find anything that helped. Dave Decker's post is very similar to my problem, but he never posted a solution, if he found one. Just in case someone wonders, I live in the woods and the closest neighbor is at least 100 meters away, so no competing networks.

The most superficially logical possibility I have come up with is that the strength of my new Mini wireless signal had dropped below the point where it can connect to my Netgear router, and the Comcast router has enough strength/sensitivity to compensate.

Wireless Diagnostics will graph signal strength, but the graph shows no change in its flat line when I try to join the network. Diagnostics Scan module shows signal to noise is about (varies a bit each time I run scan) 40 for the network that I can connect to and the one I can't.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
The most superficially logical possibility I have come up with is that the strength of my new Mini wireless signal had dropped below the point where it can connect to my Netgear router, and the Comcast router has enough strength/sensitivity to compensate. I don't know any way to test that.
Well, I guess you could power off the Comcast router, and see if you can then connect to the Netgear router, but, FYI:
Apple said:
macOS 10.14.4
Resolves Wi-Fi connection issues that may occur after upgrading to macOS Mojave.
 


Well, I guess you could power off the Comcast router, and see if you can then connect to the Netgear router, but, FYI:
Apple said:
macOS 10.14.4
Resolves Wi-Fi connection issues that may occur after upgrading to macOS Mojave.
I had been at macOS 10.14.4 for a while before this happened.

I stumbled into an embarrassing solution. Turns out I had a tiny (13 mm) USB flash drive attached, but unmounted, and I had forgotten it. When I removed it, I could connect again.

I knew USB 3 attachments could interfere, but I would expect the interference to block any network. I wondered if the interference blocks 802.11b/g/n networks differently than 802.11ac networks? I did a bit of research and found a number of sites that said the USB3 interference is in the 2.4 GHz range, but not 5 GHz. Maybe I need a new 802.11ac capable router to protect myself from myself.
 


Amazon disclaimer:
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Latest posts