LAN Connections in XP

[Steve Hayes[_2_]]

I recently bought a new Brother printer and connected it to my XP
machine.

But when my wife wanted to print something, she could no longer see my
computer on the network.

It was fine with our previous Samsung printer, which died. Her
computer is runnin Windows 8.1.

Now I find that I can't see any other computers on our LAN.

When I try to fix it, I get a message saying that I do not have
permission to connect to the other and I must ask the Administrator,

I AM the administrator, so what to I do?

Four computers on the network can see each other fine, but my XP
machine that has the printer attached, is inviduible to the others,
and them to it.

Why would it stop working?


--
Steve Hayes
http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
http://khanya.wordpress.com

[R.Wieser]

Steve,

> she could no longer see my computer on the network.
....
> Now I find that I can't see any other computers on our LAN.
....
> Why would it stop working?

The first thing that comes to mind (assuming you can still get onto the
internet) is that the "workgroup" has been changed somehow.

Right-click "My computer" -> "properties" -> "Computer name"

There should be an "workgroup" entry there, followed by a name in all
capitals. Compare with the one your wifes computer has.

You can also do some basic connectivity checks like "ping"-ing the other
computer (both ways), to make sure they can actually see each other (the LAN
is working). For that you need to figure out the IPs of the computers. To
do that open a console-window and type "ipconfig". You should see four
lines with info, with only the last number of the "IP address" being
different between the two computers.

Take that IP address to the other computer, type "ping " and than the IP
address. If all is well you will see four lines mentioning the time it took
to get an answer. If you only get time-out messages it means that both
computers cannot see each other at all (which should not happen in your
case, but you never know ... Murphies law and all that).

Hope that helps.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


-- Origional message:
Steve Hayes > schreef in berichtnieuws
...
> I recently bought a new Brother printer and connected it to my XP
> machine.
>
> But when my wife wanted to print something, she could no longer see my
> computer on the network.
>
> It was fine with our previous Samsung printer, which died. Her
> computer is runnin Windows 8.1.
>
> Now I find that I can't see any other computers on our LAN.
>
> When I try to fix it, I get a message saying that I do not have
> permission to connect to the other and I must ask the Administrator,
>
> I AM the administrator, so what to I do?
>
> Four computers on the network can see each other fine, but my XP
> machine that has the printer attached, is inviduible to the others,
> and them to it.
>
> Why would it stop working?
>
>
> --
> Steve Hayes
> http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
> http://khanya.wordpress.com

[Steve Hayes[_2_]]

On Fri, 12 May 2017 10:57:36 +0200, "R.Wieser" >
wrote:

>Steve,
>
>> she could no longer see my computer on the network.
>...
>> Now I find that I can't see any other computers on our LAN.
>...
>> Why would it stop working?
>
>The first thing that comes to mind (assuming you can still get onto the
>internet) is that the "workgroup" has been changed somehow.
>
>Right-click "My computer" -> "properties" -> "Computer name"
>
>There should be an "workgroup" entry there, followed by a name in all
>capitals. Compare with the one your wifes computer has.
>
>You can also do some basic connectivity checks like "ping"-ing the other
>computer (both ways), to make sure they can actually see each other (the LAN
>is working). For that you need to figure out the IPs of the computers. To
>do that open a console-window and type "ipconfig". You should see four
>lines with info, with only the last number of the "IP address" being
>different between the two computers.
>
>Take that IP address to the other computer, type "ping " and than the IP
>address. If all is well you will see four lines mentioning the time it took
>to get an answer. If you only get time-out messages it means that both
>computers cannot see each other at all (which should not happen in your
>case, but you never know ... Murphies law and all that).

Thanks very much. Tried that, and both timed out.

But both connect to the router on the same LAN -- my XP computer using
Ethernet, and my wife's using WiFi.


--
Steve Hayes
http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
http://khanya.wordpress.com

[R.Wieser]

Steve,

> Tried that, and both timed out.

I take it both "ipconfig" outputs where mostly the same (apart from the
rightmost number of the IP address) ? <-- important!

Also, can both (still) connect to the internet (if so that would be odd) ?

Can you *physically* connect your wifes computer to the lan (using an
ethernet cable) and check again (best to temporarily disable wifi on your
wifes/both computers so you can be sure the ethernet connection is used) ?

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


-- Origional message:
Steve Hayes > schreef in berichtnieuws
...
> On Fri, 12 May 2017 10:57:36 +0200, "R.Wieser" >
> wrote:
>
> >Steve,
> >
> >> she could no longer see my computer on the network.
> >...
> >> Now I find that I can't see any other computers on our LAN.
> >...
> >> Why would it stop working?
> >
> >The first thing that comes to mind (assuming you can still get onto the
> >internet) is that the "workgroup" has been changed somehow.
> >
> >Right-click "My computer" -> "properties" -> "Computer name"
> >
> >There should be an "workgroup" entry there, followed by a name in all
> >capitals. Compare with the one your wifes computer has.
> >
> >You can also do some basic connectivity checks like "ping"-ing the other
> >computer (both ways), to make sure they can actually see each other (the
LAN
> >is working). For that you need to figure out the IPs of the computers.
To
> >do that open a console-window and type "ipconfig". You should see four
> >lines with info, with only the last number of the "IP address" being
> >different between the two computers.
> >
> >Take that IP address to the other computer, type "ping " and than the IP
> >address. If all is well you will see four lines mentioning the time it
took
> >to get an answer. If you only get time-out messages it means that both
> >computers cannot see each other at all (which should not happen in your
> >case, but you never know ... Murphies law and all that).
>
> Thanks very much. Tried that, and both timed out.
>
> But both connect to the router on the same LAN -- my XP computer using
> Ethernet, and my wife's using WiFi.
>
>
> --
> Steve Hayes
> http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
> http://khanya.wordpress.com

[VanguardLH[_2_]]

Steve Hayes > wrote:

> But both connect to the router on the same LAN -- my XP computer using
> Ethernet, and my wife's using WiFi.

Some routers let you isolate different network segments (by using
different network segments on each port/wifi to the router). That is,
they assign a different network segment to each port/wifi connect, allow
outbound connects from each port/wifi connect to the Internet, but do
not allow traffic between the port/wifi connects.

Are all your hosts on the same network segment? Are that all assigned
something like xxx.xxx.xxx.NNN where the xxx.xxx.xxx portion is the same
for all of them? Is the submask for each the same? As per Wiesers
suggestion, you can use ipconfig /all to see the IP address hence
network segment and submask assigned to the NIC(s) in each of your
hosts.

You also need to make sure that each of your hosts and your router are
supporting the same type of IP addressing. There is IPv4 and IPv6.
While I had hosts that supported both, I had an old router that only
supported IPv4. When I got a newer router that supported IPv6, it was
assigning both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses to my hosts. IPv6 is pre-enabled
on Windows Vista+; however, IPv6 is not pre-enabled on Windows XP. See:

https://www.ghacks.net/2011/02/06/how-to-enable-ipv6-on-windows-xp/

With a router that supports both, your hosts should have both types of
IP addresses assigned but you need to make sure they are within the same
network segment and that your router is not isolating traffic between
its ports/wifi connections.

[Steve Hayes[_2_]]

On Fri, 12 May 2017 21:38:15 +0200, "R.Wieser" >
wrote:

>Steve,
>
>> Tried that, and both timed out.
>
>I take it both "ipconfig" outputs where mostly the same (apart from the
>rightmost number of the IP address) ? <-- important!
>
>Also, can both (still) connect to the internet (if so that would be odd) ?
>
>Can you *physically* connect your wifes computer to the lan (using an
>ethernet cable) and check again (best to temporarily disable wifi on your
>wifes/both computers so you can be sure the ethernet connection is used) ?

Could possibly, but my son's computer is physically connected to the
network by Ethernet, and I can't see that either.

There are five computers on the network, and four of them can see each
other, but mine can't see any of the others.

I'm wondering if installing a new printer changed a setting somewhere.


--
Steve Hayes
http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
http://khanya.wordpress.com

[Char Jackson]

On Sat, 13 May 2017 01:54:29 +0200, Steve Hayes >
wrote:

>On Fri, 12 May 2017 21:38:15 +0200, "R.Wieser" >
>wrote:
>
>>Steve,
>>
>>> Tried that, and both timed out.
>>
>>I take it both "ipconfig" outputs where mostly the same (apart from the
>>rightmost number of the IP address) ? <-- important!
>>
>>Also, can both (still) connect to the internet (if so that would be odd) ?
>>
>>Can you *physically* connect your wifes computer to the lan (using an
>>ethernet cable) and check again (best to temporarily disable wifi on your
>>wifes/both computers so you can be sure the ethernet connection is used) ?
>
>Could possibly, but my son's computer is physically connected to the
>network by Ethernet, and I can't see that either.
>
>There are five computers on the network, and four of them can see each
>other, but mine can't see any of the others.
>
>I'm wondering if installing a new printer changed a setting somewhere.

You're not answering some of the most useful questions, so it might be
best to post your network config from several PCs - one or two that seem
to work fine and the one that no longer works as expected.

Here's what mine looks like, to show you exactly what I'd like to see.
Your output will have more lines, but you can edit them out so that your
output matches mine.

C:\Windows\System32>ipconfig /all

Windows IP Configuration

Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 3:

DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.10(Preferred)
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 8.8.8.8
NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled

[Steve Hayes[_2_]]

On Sat, 13 May 2017 12:01:02 -0500, Char Jackson >
wrote:

>On Sat, 13 May 2017 01:54:29 +0200, Steve Hayes >
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 12 May 2017 21:38:15 +0200, "R.Wieser" >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Steve,
>>>
>>>> Tried that, and both timed out.
>>>
>>>I take it both "ipconfig" outputs where mostly the same (apart from the
>>>rightmost number of the IP address) ? <-- important!
>>>
>>>Also, can both (still) connect to the internet (if so that would be odd) ?
>>>
>>>Can you *physically* connect your wifes computer to the lan (using an
>>>ethernet cable) and check again (best to temporarily disable wifi on your
>>>wifes/both computers so you can be sure the ethernet connection is used) ?
>>
>>Could possibly, but my son's computer is physically connected to the
>>network by Ethernet, and I can't see that either.
>>
>>There are five computers on the network, and four of them can see each
>>other, but mine can't see any of the others.
>>
>>I'm wondering if installing a new printer changed a setting somewhere.
>
>You're not answering some of the most useful questions, so it might be
>best to post your network config from several PCs - one or two that seem
>to work fine and the one that no longer works as expected.
>
>Here's what mine looks like, to show you exactly what I'd like to see.
>Your output will have more lines, but you can edit them out so that your
>output matches mine.
>
>C:\Windows\System32>ipconfig /all
>
>Windows IP Configuration
>
>Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 3:
>
> DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
> IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.10(Preferred)
> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 8.8.8.8
> NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled

Well, here's mine:

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:\Documents and Settings\Steve>ipconfig

Windows IP Configuration


Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2:

Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.2
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1



--
Steve Hayes
http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
http://khanya.wordpress.com

[Steve Hayes[_2_]]

On Sat, 13 May 2017 12:01:02 -0500, Char Jackson >
wrote:

>On Sat, 13 May 2017 01:54:29 +0200, Steve Hayes >
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 12 May 2017 21:38:15 +0200, "R.Wieser" >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Steve,
>>>
>>>> Tried that, and both timed out.
>>>
>>>I take it both "ipconfig" outputs where mostly the same (apart from the
>>>rightmost number of the IP address) ? <-- important!
>>>
>>>Also, can both (still) connect to the internet (if so that would be odd) ?
>>>
>>>Can you *physically* connect your wifes computer to the lan (using an
>>>ethernet cable) and check again (best to temporarily disable wifi on your
>>>wifes/both computers so you can be sure the ethernet connection is used) ?
>>
>>Could possibly, but my son's computer is physically connected to the
>>network by Ethernet, and I can't see that either.
>>
>>There are five computers on the network, and four of them can see each
>>other, but mine can't see any of the others.
>>
>>I'm wondering if installing a new printer changed a setting somewhere.
>
>You're not answering some of the most useful questions, so it might be
>best to post your network config from several PCs - one or two that seem
>to work fine and the one that no longer works as expected.
>
>Here's what mine looks like, to show you exactly what I'd like to see.
>Your output will have more lines, but you can edit them out so that your
>output matches mine.
>
>C:\Windows\System32>ipconfig /all
>
>Windows IP Configuration
>
>Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 3:
>
> DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
> IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.10(Preferred)
> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 8.8.8.8
> NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled
>


Oh wait, you said /all


Windows IP Configuration

Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : STEVEDSK
Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . :
Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Unknown
IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No

Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2:

Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Realtek PCIe FE Family
Controller
Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 90-FB-A6-6C-8F-2C
Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.2
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : 13 May 2017 09:28:11 AM
Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : 14 May 2017 09:28:11 AM


--
Steve Hayes
http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
http://khanya.wordpress.com

[Lucifer Morningstar]

On Fri, 12 May 2017 10:14:24 +0200, Steve Hayes
> wrote:

>I recently bought a new Brother printer and connected it to my XP
>machine.
>
>But when my wife wanted to print something, she could no longer see my
>computer on the network.
>
>It was fine with our previous Samsung printer, which died. Her
>computer is runnin Windows 8.1.
>
>Now I find that I can't see any other computers on our LAN.
>
>When I try to fix it, I get a message saying that I do not have
>permission to connect to the other and I must ask the Administrator,
>
>I AM the administrator, so what to I do?

Ask yourself.

>Four computers on the network can see each other fine, but my XP
>machine that has the printer attached, is inviduible to the others,
>and them to it.
>
>Why would it stop working?

Did you install the XP driver for your printer?

[Shadow]

On Sun, 14 May 2017 09:37:32 +1000, Lucifer Morningstar
> wrote:

>On Fri, 12 May 2017 10:14:24 +0200, Steve Hayes
> wrote:
>
>>I recently bought a new Brother printer and connected it to my XP
>>machine.
>>
>>But when my wife wanted to print something, she could no longer see my
>>computer on the network.
>>
>>It was fine with our previous Samsung printer, which died. Her
>>computer is runnin Windows 8.1.
>>
>>Now I find that I can't see any other computers on our LAN.
>>
>>When I try to fix it, I get a message saying that I do not have
>>permission to connect to the other and I must ask the Administrator,
>>
>>I AM the administrator, so what to I do?
>
>Ask yourself.
>
>>Four computers on the network can see each other fine, but my XP
>>machine that has the printer attached, is inviduible to the others,
>>and them to it.
>>
>>Why would it stop working?
>
>Did you install the XP driver for your printer?

That would not prevent him from seeing the other computers on
the network.
I can't figure out why you get TWO completely different IPs
from your two posted ipconfigs.

Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
and
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1

They are incompatible, unless you are using a mask that covers
them all (which you are not).
Check they are ALL either 192.168.0.x OR 192.168.11.x if the
mask is 255.255.255.0
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

[Char Jackson]

On Sat, 13 May 2017 20:31:27 +0200, Steve Hayes >
wrote:

>On Sat, 13 May 2017 12:01:02 -0500, Char Jackson >
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 13 May 2017 01:54:29 +0200, Steve Hayes >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 12 May 2017 21:38:15 +0200, "R.Wieser" >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>Steve,
>>>>
>>>>> Tried that, and both timed out.
>>>>
>>>>I take it both "ipconfig" outputs where mostly the same (apart from the
>>>>rightmost number of the IP address) ? <-- important!
>>>>
>>>>Also, can both (still) connect to the internet (if so that would be odd) ?
>>>>
>>>>Can you *physically* connect your wifes computer to the lan (using an
>>>>ethernet cable) and check again (best to temporarily disable wifi on your
>>>>wifes/both computers so you can be sure the ethernet connection is used) ?
>>>
>>>Could possibly, but my son's computer is physically connected to the
>>>network by Ethernet, and I can't see that either.
>>>
>>>There are five computers on the network, and four of them can see each
>>>other, but mine can't see any of the others.
>>>
>>>I'm wondering if installing a new printer changed a setting somewhere.
>>
>>You're not answering some of the most useful questions, so it might be
>>best to post your network config from several PCs - one or two that seem
>>to work fine and the one that no longer works as expected.
>>
>>Here's what mine looks like, to show you exactly what I'd like to see.
>>Your output will have more lines, but you can edit them out so that your
>>output matches mine.
>>
>>C:\Windows\System32>ipconfig /all
>>
>>Windows IP Configuration
>>
>>Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 3:
>>
>> DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
>> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
>> IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.10(Preferred)
>> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
>> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
>> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
>> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 8.8.8.8
>> NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled
>>
>
>
>Oh wait, you said /all
>
>
>Windows IP Configuration
>
> Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : STEVEDSK
> Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . :
> Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Unknown
> IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
> WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
>
>Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2:
>
> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Realtek PCIe FE Family
>Controller
> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 90-FB-A6-6C-8F-2C
> Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.2
> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
> Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : 13 May 2017 09:28:11 AM
> Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : 14 May 2017 09:28:11 AM

Good, now post the same "ipconfig /all" from a PC that can't see yours.

What I'm expecting is that there won't be a networking issue, but it
needs to be ruled out because everything that comes later depends on
that part to be working.

If I had to guess, I'd say it's a firewall issue, but that's just a wild
guess.

While you're at it, that ping test you did earlier, let's go back to
that. Try the ping from PC A to PC B, then from PC B to PC A. If it
works in one direction but not the other, it's almost certainly a
firewall issue, assuming the network (specifically the netmask) is
configured correctly.

[Char Jackson]

On Sun, 14 May 2017 06:47:11 -0300, Shadow > wrote:

> I can't figure out why you get TWO completely different IPs
>from your two posted ipconfigs.
>
> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
> and
> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
>
> They are incompatible, unless you are using a mask that covers
>them all (which you are not).
> Check they are ALL either 192.168.0.x OR 192.168.11.x if the
>mask is 255.255.255.0
> []'s

The first one (192.168.11.1) was actually mine, which I was showing as
an example of what I wanted to see. Sorry for the confusion.

[Shadow]

On Sun, 14 May 2017 10:35:20 -0500, Char Jackson >
wrote:

>On Sun, 14 May 2017 06:47:11 -0300, Shadow > wrote:
>
>> I can't figure out why you get TWO completely different IPs
>>from your two posted ipconfigs.
>>
>> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
>> and
>> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
>>
>> They are incompatible, unless you are using a mask that covers
>>them all (which you are not).
>> Check they are ALL either 192.168.0.x OR 192.168.11.x if the
>>mask is 255.255.255.0
>> []'s
>
>The first one (192.168.11.1) was actually mine, which I was showing as
>an example of what I wanted to see. Sorry for the confusion.

I'm sorry, I was halfway through my first coffee. I hadn't
woken my brain up yet.

So if the OP is on 192.168.0.2 he should check the other
computers by pinging from his computer.

ping 192.168.0.3

(or whatever the router assigned to the next client).
He can use ipconfig on the other computers to determine their
current IPs.
If they respond, it's probably a firewall issue. If none
respond, maybe he should try pinging the router, his firewall (if he
uses a software one) might be blocking ICMP too.

ping 192.168.0.1
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

[Steve Hayes[_2_]]

On Sun, 14 May 2017 10:32:35 -0500, Char Jackson >
wrote:

>On Sat, 13 May 2017 20:31:27 +0200, Steve Hayes >
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 13 May 2017 12:01:02 -0500, Char Jackson >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 13 May 2017 01:54:29 +0200, Steve Hayes >
>>>wrote:
>>>C:\Windows\System32>ipconfig /all
>>>
>>>Windows IP Configuration
>>>
>>>Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 3:
>>>
>>> DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
>>> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
>>> IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.10(Preferred)
>>> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
>>> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
>>> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
>>> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 8.8.8.8
>>> NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled
>>>
>>
>>
>>Oh wait, you said /all
>>
>>
>>Windows IP Configuration
>>
>> Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : STEVEDSK
>> Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . :
>> Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Unknown
>> IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
>> WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
>>
>>Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2:
>>
>> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
>> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Realtek PCIe FE Family
>>Controller
>> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 90-FB-A6-6C-8F-2C
>> Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
>> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
>> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.2
>> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
>> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
>> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
>> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
>> Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : 13 May 2017 09:28:11 AM
>> Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : 14 May 2017 09:28:11 AM
>
>Good, now post the same "ipconfig /all" from a PC that can't see yours.
>
>What I'm expecting is that there won't be a networking issue, but it
>needs to be ruled out because everything that comes later depends on
>that part to be working.
>
>If I had to guess, I'd say it's a firewall issue, but that's just a wild
>guess.
>
>While you're at it, that ping test you did earlier, let's go back to
>that. Try the ping from PC A to PC B, then from PC B to PC A. If it
>works in one direction but not the other, it's almost certainly a
>firewall issue, assuming the network (specifically the netmask) is
>configured correctly.

The ping didn't work either way.

Just waiting for other machine to boot up....


Windows IP Configuration

Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : Steve-TOSH
Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . :
Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Hybrid
IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No

Wireless LAN adapter BearExtender:

Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
Description . . . . . . . . . . . : 802.11 USB Wireless LAN Card
Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-15-61-52-67-01
DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . :
fe80::1d66:c745:ad79:166b%16(Preferred)
IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.8(Preferred)
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : 15 May 2017 05:32:35 AM
Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : 16 May 2017 05:32:31 AM
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
DHCPv6 IAID . . . . . . . . . . . : 385881441
DHCPv6 Client DUID. . . . . . . . :
00-01-00-01-13-13-08-D2-00-26-22-F2-31-DF
DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled

Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:

Media State . . . . . . . . . . . : Media disconnected
Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Realtek PCIe FE Family
Controller
Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-26-22-F2-31-DF
DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes

Tunnel adapter Local Area Connection* 11:

Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Teredo Tunneling
Pseudo-Interface
Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-E0
DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No
Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
IPv6 Address. . . . . . . . . . . :
2001:0:9d38:6abd:c57:37c7:961e:445c(Preferred)
Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . :
fe80::c57:37c7:961e:445c%19(Preferred)
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : ::
NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Disabled

Tunnel adapter isatap.{592CE8C6-8641-4C16-A416-BB5734CC3BCE}:

Media State . . . . . . . . . . . : Media disconnected
Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Microsoft ISATAP Adapter #4
Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-E0
DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No
Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes


--
Steve Hayes
http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
http://khanya.wordpress.com

[VanguardLH[_2_]]

Host #1:
IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.10(Preferred)
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1
DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.11.1

Host #2:
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.2
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1

Host #3:
IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.8(Preferred)
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1

Host #2 just says "IP address", not "IPv4 address". Is host #2 your
Windows XP host?

Does your router actually have 2 DHCP servers to serve different
subnets? I don't remember seeing consumer-grade routers with multiple
DHCP servers. If it has just one DHCP server (likely), what is its IP
address and [sub]netmask values?

Are you chaining routers (one router chains to the main router that goes
to the cable modem)? Are you using an AP (access point) for wi-fi
access that chains to the main router going to the cable modem? If so,
did you leave the DHCP server enabled in the downstream router or AP
instead of having it pass that traffic up to the main router's DHCP
server? If you don't want subnetting then use the downstream router or
AP as a simple switch, not as a router and not using its DHCP server.

Host #1 = 192.168.11.10
Host #2 = 192.168. 0. 2
Host #3 = 192.168. 0. 8
(spaces added only to provide alignment for readability)

You've got 2 hosts on 192.168.0.x and one on 192.168.11.x. Two are have
a 3rd octet of 0 (zero) while one has a 3rd octet of 11. While all of
them use 255.255.255.0 for the subnet mask, that mask only covers
addresses in the 192.168.1.0/24 range (or 192.168.1.0 to 192.168.1.255).
192.168.11.x is outside that range so it is in a different subnet than
for your other two hosts. If you don't want to change the assigned IP
address to each host, you need to change their subnet mask so they are
within the same subnet, like 255.255.0.0 (or 255.255.240.0 at a
minimum).

http://jodies.de/ipcalc?host=192.168.11.10&mask1=20&mask2=

To get 11.x into the same subnet as for 0.x, you need the netmask to
have zeros (which bits to ignore or put under the same subnet) under the
maximum significant binary digits for an address. 11 decimal = 1101
binary. That's 4 more digits you want to include in addressing to stay
in the same subnet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subnetwork
Traffic is exchanged (routed) between subnetworks with special
gateways (routers) when the routing prefixes of the source address and
the destination address differ. A router constitutes the logical or
physical boundary between the subnets.

That is true *if* the router is configured to allow traffic between its
subnets. Is it?

If you want 11.x and 0.x to be in the same subnet, does your router use
a subnet mask of 255.255.240.0, or lower? If you want one host's IP
address to be in a subnet of another host, their subnet masks must span
a range to include both addresses. The subnet mask defines the
boundaries (addressing range) of an IP subnet. The router might have a
feature to allow traffic between subnets (if enabled). It might not.
Tough to know what is in your network, how devices are chained, and how
they are configured. Subnetting might be the problem. Might not if the
router(s) were configured to pass traffic between them.

For example, the corporate network did not want our high volume of test
traffic to our test hosts on their network. We employed a switch that
simply isolated each subnet. Traffic on the alpha lab's subnet stayed
in the alpha lab's network and did not impinge on the corporate network;
however, select alpha lab hosts in the switch's config were allowed to
connect to the corporate subnet. Routers have switches, too. Traffic
isolation was afforded by restricting traffic across subnets.

Are you sure the printer is configured as a shareable resource on your
Windows XP host? On the host (Windows XP) to which the printer is
attached, go to Control Panel -> Printers and Other Hardware -> Printers
and Faxes. Right-click on the printer. Under the Sharing tab, is the
printer shared? Under the Additional Drivers button, you have to enable
the driver(s) that each of your other host(s) will use. Also, back
under the Security tab (of the Windows XP host to which the printer is
connected), check the Everyone security group is listed as having Print
permission. Being able to find a printer doesn't necessarily grant
permission to use it. "bought a new Brother printer and connected it to
my XP machine" does not say you installed the device's driver.

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb457001.aspx
https://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/print_security_permissionsw.mspx?mfr=true

When you get prompted that you need permissions for Administrator, it is
NOT asking for you to use an admin-level account on the host you are
using. It is asking for the admin on the OTHER host to grant your
permission to connect there. You have to go to other host to which you
are trying to connect (and to which the printer is connected) to grant
the host you are currently using to connect that other host.

For whatever account name under which you log under on one host, did you
define an account on Windows XP by the same name and password?

[Shadow]

On Mon, 15 May 2017 03:11:48 -0500, VanguardLH > wrote:

>
>Host #1 = 192.168.11.10
>Host #2 = 192.168. 0. 2
>Host #3 = 192.168. 0. 8

You made the same mistake I did.
192.168.11.10 was the IP of another poster trying to help

Only

192.168.0.2 and
192.168.0.8

were from the OP. He can't ping 192.168.0.8 from 192.168.0.2
(his computer), but he can see the router at 192.168.0.1, so I'd say a
firewall issue.
He didn't post the ping from 192.168.0.8 and 192.168.0.2 to
the router, so I'm at a lost as to whether the firewall block is at
the router or his machine.
[]'s

--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

[Steve Hayes[_2_]]

On Mon, 15 May 2017 11:28:17 -0300, Shadow > wrote:

> He didn't post the ping from 192.168.0.8 and 192.168.0.2 to
>the router, so I'm at a lost as to whether the firewall block is at
>the router or his machine.
> []'s

Here you go:

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:\Documents and Settings\Steve>ping 192.168.0.1

Pinging 192.168.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for 192.168.0.1:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms


--
Steve Hayes
http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
http://khanya.wordpress.com

[Lucifer Morningstar]

On Tue, 16 May 2017 06:34:37 +0200, Steve Hayes
> wrote:

>On Mon, 15 May 2017 11:28:17 -0300, Shadow > wrote:
>
>> He didn't post the ping from 192.168.0.8 and 192.168.0.2 to
>>the router, so I'm at a lost as to whether the firewall block is at
>>the router or his machine.
>> []'s
>
>Here you go:
>
>Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
>(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
>
>C:\Documents and Settings\Steve>ping 192.168.0.1
>
>Pinging 192.168.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:
>
>Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
>Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
>Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
>Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
>
>Ping statistics for 192.168.0.1:
> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
>Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
> Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms

After much Googleing and trying different things I was able to get
my Acer Aspire One with Windows XP to print to my laser printer
which is connected to a desktop running Windows 10.

[Shadow]

On Tue, 16 May 2017 06:34:37 +0200, Steve Hayes
> wrote:

>On Mon, 15 May 2017 11:28:17 -0300, Shadow > wrote:
>
>> He didn't post the ping from 192.168.0.8 and 192.168.0.2 to
>>the router, so I'm at a lost as to whether the firewall block is at
>>the router or his machine.
>> []'s
>
>Here you go:
>
>Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
>(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
>
>C:\Documents and Settings\Steve>ping 192.168.0.1
>
>Pinging 192.168.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:
>
>Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
>Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
>Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
>Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
>
>Ping statistics for 192.168.0.1:
> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
>Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
> Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms

You forgot 192.168.0.8 (or whatever the other PC's current IP
is) to the router.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

[Steve Hayes[_2_]]

On Tue, 16 May 2017 09:29:09 -0300, Shadow > wrote:

>On Tue, 16 May 2017 06:34:37 +0200, Steve Hayes
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 15 May 2017 11:28:17 -0300, Shadow > wrote:
>>
>>> He didn't post the ping from 192.168.0.8 and 192.168.0.2 to
>>>the router, so I'm at a lost as to whether the firewall block is at
>>>the router or his machine.
>>> []'s
>>
>>Here you go:
>>
>>Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
>>(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
>>
>>C:\Documents and Settings\Steve>ping 192.168.0.1
>>
>>Pinging 192.168.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:
>>
>>Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
>>Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
>>Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
>>Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
>>
>>Ping statistics for 192.168.0.1:
>> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
>>Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
>> Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms
>
> You forgot 192.168.0.8 (or whatever the other PC's current IP
>is) to the router.
> []'s

Thank you, everyone for your help.

Suddenly, with no intervention from me, my XP machine (on which I'm
typing this) is back on the network.

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:\Documents and Settings\Steve>ping 192.168.0.8

Pinging 192.168.0.8 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 192.168.0.8: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.0.8: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.0.8: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.0.8: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=128

Ping statistics for 192.168.0.8:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1ms, Maximum = 60ms, Average = 18ms

I don't recall doing anything to cause it to work again.

I had copied some stuff from the web to a spreadsheet, and wanted my
wife to manipulate it, as she is a spreadsheet fundi, and was about to
copy it to a flash drive when she said she could see my computer on
the network again, and so I copied it to the public directory on her
Win 8.1 laptop, and it worked.

I then set up my laptop and pinged it, with the result seen above.


--
Steve Hayes
http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
http://khanya.wordpress.com