networking T4 & Windows 10 version 1803

[dr_hoon]

Hi there!

I recently upgraded Windows from 7 to 10 and, after 2 years of networking without issue, I can't establish a satisfactory connection. Although I can occasionally see the Windows network shares from my T4 (firmware 17.5), I cannot access the directory contents. And from Windows, I can access the T4 some of the time - I have no idea what the criteria is for successfully establishing the connection at this end, one minute it works and the next it doesn't, and the next it does.

I've read through the many posts on networking and have pretty much already tried everything that seemed relevant to T series boxes and Windows 10. I'm suspecting the recent Windows 10 version 1803 is adding even more mystery to the matter, such as no longer supporting Guest accounts.

I thought a fresh upgrade to the latest firmware and a clean install of the latest Windows version would have been cause for a networking no-brainer. Boy was I wrong. Any help or advice on this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Regards

Aaron

[MrQuade]

Yea, at this point, I think it is now time to simply accept the fact that anonymous access to a Windows share is basically too much hassle. Microsoft are determined to protect us from ourselves as well as others.

The most reliable way to connect is to ensure that you have some sort of user account set up on the Windows 10 box and ensure:
1) that that the user has a password
2) the user is given permissions set on the share
3) the user has permission to access the filesystem path that is being shared

If you don't want to use your own user credentials for this purpose, then setting up a network-only user for the purposes of configuring sharing permissions on Windows is a bloody nightmare too. You have to start with the "add a new user" interface, then click through several layers of hidden links to get past the UI so that you can create a user that isn't linked to an email address or an actual person.

In short "generic credentials" are just hard work now.

This is just the Windows side of things too. You also need to make sure that the actual networking side of your network is in good order if you want Windows PCs or the Beyonwiz PVRs to properly resolve the device name on your network.

All devices should be using a common DNS server which is in communication with the local DHCP server, and all devices should be getting their IP addresses from the DHCP server, either as dynamic addresses, or fixed by MAC. In practice, this typically means that you should point all devices to use your router's DNS server, and also obtain IP addresses from the router via DHCP.

Finally, if you want Windows Explorer to be able to automatically find and list your Beyonwiz PVRs, then you need to make sure that only one device on the network is acting as the SMB master browser. This bit gets a bit tricky, and usually involves trying to designate one device on the network with a higher master browser election priority than the others. An always-on device is the best one to assign as your master browser. I personally use my NAS, but others may want to set their router as the master browser if it supports the feature.

Sometimes getting the SMB master browser stuff working comes down to luck and boot order. Having Windows Explorer automatically list your SMB devices is just a nice-to-have feature though, and you can safely do without it if that isn't important to you.

[dr_hoon]

Thanks for the detailed reply, MrQuade. Much appreciated.

I've worked through your recommendations but still aren't having any luck. I've tried using my admin windows account credentials, as well as creating a new user and using those. Both accounts have share access. The DNS server on both devices is set to the router's IP address, and both devices have fixed addresses using their MAC address, via the route's DHCP.

The concept of a master browser is where my knowledge runs out though. I have a decent router with good firmware (it's the Asus Merlin firmware that's similar to Tomato) and it supports 'forced master browser'. So, I enabled this setting, but it was listed under the USB Application settings and I have no device plugged into the router's USB port. Knowing nothing about master browsers and SMB, I have no idea whether this setting is having any effect, as the T4 is connected to the router via wifi, and the Windows box is connected to the router via ethernet.

You say you're using a NAS - have you personally had any luck using your Beyonwiz to directly access files on a PC running the latest version of WIndows 10?

Regards

Aaron

[MrQuade]

I've worked through your recommendations but still aren't having any luck. I've tried using my admin windows account credentials, as well as creating a new user and using those. Both accounts have share access. The DNS server on both devices is set to the router's IP address, and both devices have fixed addresses using their MAC address, via the route's DHCP.

The DNS/DHCP stuff is handy for accessing all your devices by name rather than IP address, but even if that wasn't working quite right, it shouldn't get in the way of accessing the PC shares, but it will help.

Where does the process fail for you in this scenario?
When you invoke the Network Browser on the U4, can it find the PC's name?
When you select the PC's name in the Network Browser with the OK button, do you answer "yes" to the password prompt and enter your details?
after entering the username/password details does it reliably list the shares? You mentioned in your original post that it occasionally fails?
When you select the shares, it will ask for the username and password again. Do you re-enter the username and password for the second time? (you do need to do this).

The concept of a master browser is where my knowledge runs out though. I have a decent router with good firmware (it's the Asus Merlin firmware that's similar to Tomato) and it supports 'forced master browser'. So, I enabled this setting, but it was listed under the USB Application settings and I have no device plugged into the router's USB port. Knowing nothing about master browsers and SMB, I have no idea whether this setting is having any effect, as the T4 is connected to the router via wifi, and the Windows box is connected to the router via ethernet.

I can't blame you at all for getting lost there, it is one of those things that is supposed to "just work" but really doesn't, so there aren't many tools to figure out what went wrong.
That being said though, this is an optional feature that shouldn't affect your ability to browse PC shares from the U4.

And setting the force master browser setting in the router should do the trick for you. I run a rt-ac86u myself, but haven't loaded Merlin since I gave it a crack after first buying the router. The early pace of firmware upgrades meant that Merlin was a bit behind, and there were a few real showstopper bugs when the router was first released.

You say you're using a NAS - have you personally had any luck using your Beyonwiz to directly access files on a PC running the latest version of WIndows 10?

I mostly use my NAS and another Linux server for sharing files, but I have created a working share on my PC for testing/diagnostic purposes. Once I got past the user creation hurdle, the rest of it just worked. I will give it another try when I am able to make sure I didn't miss anything though.

[Paul_oz53]

Hi there!

I recently upgraded Windows from 7 to 10 and, after 2 years of networking without issue, I can't establish a satisfactory connection. Although I can occasionally see the Windows network shares from my T4 (firmware 17.5), I cannot access the directory contents. And from Windows, I can access the T4 some of the time - I have no idea what the criteria is for successfully establishing the connection at this end, one minute it works and the next it doesn't, and the next it does.

I've read through the many posts on networking and have pretty much already tried everything that seemed relevant to T series boxes and Windows 10. I'm suspecting the recent Windows 10 version 1803 is adding even more mystery to the matter, such as no longer supporting Guest accounts.

I thought a fresh upgrade to the latest firmware and a clean install of the latest Windows version would have been cause for a networking no-brainer. Boy was I wrong. Any help or advice on this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Regards

Aaron

MrQuade is right in all he says. MS has been making it much harder to access a share without credentials.

A cheat I have used up until recently is to open a DOS command window as administrator (vital) and run the command (no quotes) "net user guest Bwiz". Then, on the Bwiz, I setup mounts with username "guest" and password "Bwiz".

I haven't tried it on the Win 10 laptop lately (work closed off my admin privileges on the laptop - mean bastards ) but it used to work for me. I'd be interested to know if you tried this approach.

[dr_hoon]

Where does the process fail for you in this scenario?

The process fails right at the moment where I select the purported successfully mounted directory - instead of seeing the contents of my PC drive, I instead get a message saying the directory does not exist. Up to that point, everything is looking fine, I can see the PC and the shared directory, and it allegedly mounts successfully. Every now and again in the network browser, I have to rescan the network for my network to appear, and sometimes the shares don't appear when I expand the list, but this doesn't seem to hinder the mounting process. And yes, I enter the username and passwords under both settings.

A cheat I have used up until recently is to open a DOS command window as administrator (vital) and run the command (no quotes) "net user guest Bwiz". Then, on the Bwiz, I setup mounts with username "guest" and password "Bwiz".

Yes, I have tried this. Although I did have to add the '/activate yes' command before 'guest' would show up as an option in the Windows sharing settings. That being said though, everything I'm reading online says that the recent version 1803 of Windows 10 has discontinued guest functionality. So I also tried adding a different username using the command prompt (as an admin). Still no luck.

[MrQuade]

I've just tried setting up a mount now and it is failing in the same way as you are experiencing. I'll investigate further.

[Grumpy_Geoff]

Where does the process fail for you in this scenario?

The process fails right at the moment where I select the purported successfully mounted directory - instead of seeing the contents of my PC drive, I instead get a message saying the directory does not exist.

For the error 'directory {blah} does not exist', check the share details in these two files to ensure they match -
/etc/auto.network
/etc/enigma2/automounts.xml
If you've been changing shit without rebooting they can very easily get a mismatch.

Another thing that has hit me is SMB 1.0 support was disabled in a Windows update - it recently stopped my brother getting access to his shares from his DP-P2 and from his Android OTT box. After enabling SMB 1.0 in Windows he was a happy man.
My Windows share shows up under OpenWebif as using SMB 1.0 -

Code: Select all

WizShare_I5:	SMBv1.0 using autofs: //192.168.1.50/Wiz-Share (192.168.1.50)

[Paul_oz53]

Hi dr_hoon,

This article sets out that the guest account has been nuked since 10159 and that attempts to create it are harmful to your PC. It goes on to show remedies.

But this doesn't explain why creating a local user doesn't work either. Hopefully MrQuade will solve the conundrum.

[MrQuade]

Not having much luck yet.

The Windows 10 share is available from my Fedora laptop (using caja) without having to do anything exotic on the Windows end.

I want to avoid having to enable SMB1 on Windows, as this is a setting that is likely to keep getting disabled with subsequent updates until Microsoft finally decide to remove the option alltogether.

I have tried the following lines in /etc/samba/smb_host.conf on my U4

protocol = SMB2 (or SMB3)
min protocol = SMB2 (or SMB3)
client min protocol = SMB2 (or SMB3)
client max protocol = SMB3

none of those seem to make a difference.

I guess the next step is to actually temporarily enable SMB1 on Windows and see if that fixes it. If so, I will keep chasing down that path.

The fact that it works from a different Linux host means that a solution should be possible on the U4 side.

[dr_hoon]

Thanks everybody for all your help. As a result I've made significant progress.

Another thing that has hit me is SMB 1.0 support was disabled in a Windows update - it recently stopped my brother getting access to his shares from his DP-P2 and from his Android OTT box. After enabling SMB 1.0 in Windows he was a happy man.

SMB 1.0 is indeed disabled in Windows 10, and although I'd read that it was completely nuked in the most recent update, I was still able to turn it on using Control Panel > Programs > Turn Windows Features On or Off. Abracadabra... I can access files on my PC from my T4... momentarily. When I exit from the media browser and return again, it says the directory doesn't exist, just for old times' sake. And if I restart the network, it works again.

I want to avoid having to enable SMB1 on Windows

This may be the only option. But after messing around with it for days, this breakthrough has given me hope. Yes, it's workable, but I'd love to get to the bottom of why it's so temperamental, because I like things that work like they're supposed to.

[MrQuade]

Ok, I found the right place.

From the U4 GUI, open the mountpoint management, then edit the Windows mount.

The "Mount options" needs to be "rw,utf8,vers=3.0"

worked straight away

I wonder what we can do to make that easier to configure, or maybe set a default of some sort that is not going to upset non-Windows servers.

I think it has something to do with the U4 trying the lowest possible protocol first before trying later protocol versions. It seems as if Windows is seeing the SMB1 attempt and just outright denying access rather than gracefully allowing further attempts. maybe....

[dr_hoon]

Ok, I found the right place.

From the U4 GUI, open the mountpoint management, then edit the Windows mount.

The "Mount options" needs to be "rw,utf8,vers=3.0"

worked straight away

Really?! Without having to enable SMB 1.0? That's brilliant, thanks a bunch. See you at the party Richter!

[MrQuade]

Really?! Without having to enable SMB 1.0? That's brilliant, thanks a bunch. See you at the party Richter!

Yep, no need to enable SMB1 on Windows. I am still watching Castle Rock, and was too lazy to get up and change anything there so persevered with the U4 from the couch .

[dr_hoon]

S O L V E D

I can confirm that it works perfectly for me too. Thanks again MrQuade!

This information is huge. I think the 'vers=3.0' fix needs to be included in future firmware, as these units won't behave themselves otherwise.

[MrQuade]

This information is huge. I think the 'vers=3.0' fix needs to be included in future firmware, as these units won't behave themselves otherwise.

I agree that some new default settings should be set up, but not necessarily simply making vers=3.0 as a default mount option.

That setting works for Windows 10, but could possibly upset connections to anything that doesn't support SMB3.

I'll defer to PeterU to make a call on this since he will have a far better grasp of the implications and what alternative defaults may be available.

[dr_hoon]

That setting works for Windows 10, but could possibly upset connections to anything that doesn't support SMB3.

Maybe incorporate a selection of popular OS defaults into a menu?

[Paul_oz53]

I gave vers=3.0 a run on the win7 network to see if it works there. Sadly, no.

Vers=2.0 does work though. No need to reboot between edits. Remounting is sufficient to apply the change.

[MrQuade]

I'll gave vers=3.0 a run on the win7 network to see if it works there. Sadly, no.

Vers=2.0 does work though. No need to reboot between edits. Remounting is sufficient to apply the change.

Cool, hence my hesitiation to make 3.0 the default. I am surprised that Windows 7 is not capable of supporting 3 though.

2.0 should work for Windows 10 too though, so 2.0 would be a more conservative default for all Windows versions.

[dr_hoon]

Hi there again. Just thought I'd report back after trying this out for a couple of days.

The network connection isn't 100% stable - it does drop out occasionally and the network needs to be reset. This isn't a big deal though, as it's not doing it regularly enough to ruin the overall Beyonwiz experience.

However, my wireless connection speed has slowed waaaay down. I'm using the wireless USB dongle that came with my T4 two years ago. As I upgraded Windows and the T4 firmware at the same time, I haven't yet been able to isolate the culprit but did see the other thread on this matter, suggesting that the 17.5 upgrade is the issue. The thread does seem somewhat unresolved, should I be posting this question there? My problem is that my wireless connection isn't fast enough to stream a HD movie file, it's only useful for slowly transferring files. I honestly can't remember whether my connection on the 16.1 firmware was at 2.4 or 5GHz, as I set it up two years ago and it served its purpose. Now though, I can only detect the 2.4GHz signal and the T4 says I'm getting 72Mbps (despite the info saying the connection is 48Mbps max). Thanks in advance for everybody's wonderful sense of diligence!

[MrQuade]

Hi there again. Just thought I'd report back after trying this out for a couple of days.

The network connection isn't 100% stable - it does drop out occasionally and the network needs to be reset. This isn't a big deal though, as it's not doing it regularly enough to ruin the overall Beyonwiz experience.

In what way is it dropping out? What devices/settings are you resetting to get things running again?

(FYI, one of the reasons I abandoned Merlin firmware in the beginning was for weekly lockups of the router.....however, as I said, it was on a branch of Merlin firmware that had only just introduced support for my router, and I expected it to be wiggy at that early stage).

However, my wireless connection speed has slowed waaaay down. I'm using the wireless USB dongle that came with my T4 two years ago. As I upgraded Windows and the T4 firmware at the same time, I haven't yet been able to isolate the culprit but did see the other thread on this matter, suggesting that the 17.5 upgrade is the issue. The thread does seem somewhat unresolved, should I be posting this question there? My problem is that my wireless connection isn't fast enough to stream a HD movie file, it's only useful for slowly transferring files. I honestly can't remember whether my connection on the 16.1 firmware was at 2.4 or 5GHz, as I set it up two years ago and it served its purpose. Now though, I can only detect the 2.4GHz signal and the T4 says I'm getting 72Mbps (despite the info saying the connection is 48Mbps max). Thanks in advance for everybody's wonderful sense of diligence!

There does appear to have been a change in the USB dongle drivers that has resulted in a network slowdown. Probably best to continue your observations in that other existing thread to keep all the discussions together.

One good and common recommendation is to abandon the use of USB network dongles and instead opt for a WiFi bridge/client device. If you have a spare router kicking about, you could configure it as a WiFi client to your main router and connect the U4 (and any other devices in the vicinity) to the client router via Ethernet. The client router will almost certainly be capable of higher throughput, and can service several devices at once which will help keep wireless contention down as well.

[dr_hoon]

Thanks for the quick response MrQuade.

In what way is it dropping out? What devices/settings are you resetting to get things running again?

If, on the T4, I navigate out of the shared directory and come back to it later on, there's a reasonable chance it's disconnected. When attempting to access the shared directory, I get the 'does not exist' error (as originally experienced before the SMB fix). If I reset the network using the T4 Setup > Network > Reset Network, everything is fine again.

Probably best to continue your observations in that other existing thread to keep all the discussions together.

Will do - posting there now...

[MrQuade]

If, on the T4, I navigate out of the shared directory and come back to it later on, there's a reasonable chance it's disconnected. When attempting to access the shared directory, I get the 'does not exist' error (as originally experienced before the SMB fix). If I reset the network using the T4 Setup > Network > Reset Network, everything is fine again.

Ahh, gocha.
Are you mounting the shares as fstab or AutoFS? An AutoFS mount should automatically reconnect after a failure whereas a fstab one will not try to establish itself after the T4 has initially booted.

[dr_hoon]

Are you mounting the shares as fstab or AutoFS?

AutoFS

[Paul_oz53]

If, on the T4, I navigate out of the shared directory and come back to it later on, there's a reasonable chance it's disconnected. When attempting to access the shared directory, I get the 'does not exist' error (as originally experienced before the SMB fix). If I reset the network using the T4 Setup > Network > Reset Network, everything is fine again.

Ahh, gocha.
Are you mounting the shares as fstab or AutoFS? An AutoFS mount should automatically reconnect after a failure whereas a fstab one will not try to establish itself after the T4 has initially booted.

I remount a share when this happens but it probably has the same effect. I'm not convinced that autofs actually reconnects though. I often have to manually reconnect when a share goes down despite always using autofs.

My experiments with wireless match your outcome. The 2.4 GHz band connection only gives 72 Mbps and transfers are slower than that. The 5Ghz band is six times faster if you use the EDUP dongle. Otherwise, the way to go would be a wireless bridge. Haven't ever tried reconfiguring an old router though but it may be worth a try.

[dr_hoon]

Apologies for posting this here, rather than the other wifi thread, but this seems to be where the discussion is happening...

The 5Ghz band is six times faster if you use the EDUP dongle

I've got a bunch of questions... Should the Beyonwiz wifi dongle be able connect to the 5GHz band or do I need a different one to do that? Also, which EDUP dongle are you using specifically? And is it a 600MHz dongle? Is it guaranteed to work on my T4 with firmware 17.5 and give me 6 times the current speed? I see the Beyonwiz store has a 600MHz wifi dongle, but it only says it's for the U4 - does this imply there are factors to consider when trying to connect a 600MHz dongle to a T4?

I guess I'm wondering if I can just buy the cheapest 600MHz wifi dongle I can find (ie eBay) and get a faster connection than if I was to use the Beyonwiz dongle and firmware 16.1? Distance isn't really an issue, as my router is only 3-4 metres away - and for reasons that I won't bore everyone with, an ethernet cable isn't a preferred option if I can avoid it.

[MrQuade]

I've got a bunch of questions... Should the Beyonwiz wifi dongle be able connect to the 5GHz band or do I need a different one to do that? Also, which EDUP dongle are you using specifically? And is it a 600MHz dongle? Is it guaranteed to work on my T4 with firmware 17.5 and give me 6 times the current speed? I see the Beyonwiz store has a 600MHz wifi dongle, but it only says it's for the U4 - does this imply there are factors to consider when trying to connect a 600MHz dongle to a T4?

Not sure, but would could plug the dongle into your PC and experiment with it there.

Have you named your 2.4GHz and 5Ghz SSIDs differently? If you plug it into the PC and can see the 5GHz SSID, then that's your answer.

Also, it's not 600MHz frequency, it is referring to the bitrate which is 600Mbps

I guess I'm wondering if I can just buy the cheapest 600MHz wifi dongle I can find (ie eBay) and get a faster connection than if I was to use the Beyonwiz dongle and firmware 16.1? Distance isn't really an issue, as my router is only 3-4 metres away - and for reasons that I won't bore everyone with, an ethernet cable isn't a preferred option if I can avoid it.

The T4 supports a very wide variety of USB WiFi hardware. You can buy a bunch of generic adaptors to try out as long as it has a compatible chipset.

[Paul_oz53]

Apologies for posting this here, rather than the other wifi thread, but this seems to be where the discussion is happening...

The 5Ghz band is six times faster if you use the EDUP dongle

I've got a bunch of questions... Should the Beyonwiz wifi dongle be able connect to the 5GHz band or do I need a different one to do that? Also, which EDUP dongle are you using specifically? And is it a 600MHz dongle? Is it guaranteed to work on my T4 with firmware 17.5 and give me 6 times the current speed? I see the Beyonwiz store has a 600MHz wifi dongle, but it only says it's for the U4 - does this imply there are factors to consider when trying to connect a 600MHz dongle to a T4?

I guess I'm wondering if I can just buy the cheapest 600MHz wifi dongle I can find (ie eBay) and get a faster connection than if I was to use the Beyonwiz dongle and firmware 16.1? Distance isn't really an issue, as my router is only 3-4 metres away - and for reasons that I won't bore everyone with, an ethernet cable isn't a preferred option if I can avoid it.

The black dongle is 2.4GHz only, AFAIK. Mine is the older white EDUP 600AC without an aerial that gave around 25 MBps transfers when I last tried it on the U4. The specs say its max speed is 432 Mbps. eBay has them around $16-22. Don't know if the later model with an aerial will work - maybe worth a shot if you're game. I expect the T4 will have the drivers installed, same as the U4.

I can't help wondering if the solution might be to identify the exact version of the RTL8192 driver used in the 16.1 series firmware and then, in the 17.5 firmware uninstall all the 8192 drivers that are not identical to the 16.1 driver. My theory is that an updated driver is being selected from the four that are available in the 17.5 firmware. (Menu>Plugins>Remove Plugins>Drivers).

If the 16.1 version is not in the current set, remove them all and force its installation. The downside is that you will need to maintain this everytime you do a USB firmware update and other models of adapter may not function without the driver.

[Grumpy_Geoff]

That Beyonwiz/EDUP AC600 dongle is discussed in this topic - viewtopic.php?f=43&t=12680
Other possibly similar AC600 adapters @ MSY are listed too.

The RTL8192CU operates on only the 2.4 GHZ chip - it's not dual-band.
That chip is in the Beyonwiz 'WiFi USB Antenna (Wireless N 300Mbps) T2 – T3 – T4' adapter.

A quick Google popped up this complaint about shithouse performance in the Raspberry pi when using that chip - https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux/issues/1866

[Paul_oz53]

That Beyonwiz/EDUP AC600 dongle is discussed in this topic - viewtopic.php?f=43&t=12680
Other possibly similar AC600 adapters @ MSY are listed too.

The RTL8192CU operates on only the 2.4 GHZ chip - it's not dual-band.
That chip is in the Beyonwiz 'WiFi USB Antenna (Wireless N 300Mbps) T2 – T3 – T4' adapter.

A quick Google popped up this complaint about shithouse performance in the Raspberry pi when using that chip - https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux/issues/1866

Geoff's highlighted raspberry Pi link includes the discovery by the poster that the rtl8192cu driver was problematic but the 8192cu version worked fine. I wonder if this is what you are also seeing.

[peteru]

I think the 'vers=3.0' fix needs to be included in future firmware

I agree that some new default settings should be set up, but not necessarily simply making vers=3.0 as a default mount option.

That setting works for Windows 10, but could possibly upset connections to anything that doesn't support SMB3.

I'll defer to PeterU to make a call on this since he will have a far better grasp of the implications and what alternative defaults may be available.

I had a poke around and it is indeed problematic. Probably not for the reasons you'd expect though. The problem lies in the T3 kernel - it won't support "3.0" or even "2.0". The T3 kernel does have support for "2.1", so that may be an option, but more ground work is required first...