Query regarding network setup

MalcolmSu

I'm actually not sure if I have a problem that requires resolution or just a query.  :-)

First up, I inherited this network set-up and networking is not my forte... It's a home network with both a wired component and a wireless side.  I installed Fing - more out of curiosity than because I thought I had a problem. I installed it on my tablet, connected via wifi and it discovered 50 devices. I scanned through those and thought there were a few missing. 

So I then installed Fing on my Windows PC - which is on the wired network. On the desktop Fing said it could not complete the network scanning.


So I started to investigate further. There are two routers - the wifi one on 192.168.152.x and the wired one on 192.168.0.x each running a DHCP server. There's also a couple of wired switches.

So I think my initial question is what's stopping Fing scanning the wired part of the network?

From the scan of the wireless side I have a fiew other quetsions but I think i'll save these for later until I understand better how this is all set up. Everything is actually working okay so I am reluctant to do much fiddling .Okay?

Marc

Fing can only scan a single network at a time.  On the desktop if you want to do two networks, you would have to connect the laptop or desktop to that network and scan it.  Fingbox can do one and only one.  

I would guess thats why your not seeing everything.

MalcolmSu

I created another account and signed in to Fing on my desktop PC. When I try to scan the network I get the error message 

"Something went wrong!

It seems that your discovery has been corrupted! Please come back and scan it again."

Pixel

Hi @MalcolmSu sorry to hear you’re having problems. 
Are your two routers physically connected to each other (ethernet cable) via your network switches or directly linked to each other? If they are it would cause all sorts of problems so you would need to disable DHCP, preferably leave DHCP running on the router connected directly to your broadband.

If you could check this and feedback your findings and we will continue from there.

Good luck

Pixel

Marc

Pixel said:

Hi @MalcolmSu sorry to hear you’re having problems. 
Are your two routers physically connected to each other (ethernet cable) via your network switches or directly linked to each other? If they are it would cause all sorts of problems so you would need to disable DHCP, preferably leave DHCP running on the router connected directly to your broadband.

If you could check this and feedback your findings and we will continue from there.

Good luck

Pixel

@pixel, I kind of keyed off the fact that he's running two routers on two networks, ("the wifi one on 192.168.152.x and the wired one on 192.168.0.x each running a DHCP server") that could be throwing this whole thing off.  Especially considering Fing can only handle one network at a time.  Thoughts??

Pixel

Hi @Marc I think the fact that “discovering” having two routers raised my concerns that there might be something fairly simple going on. It’s by no means certain they’re connected physically but I’d like to eliminate that as a potential source of trouble. There could be a couple of subnets on the same network but only one dhcp. Easy stuff first before we start digging deeper 🙏

MalcolmSu

Pixel said:

Hi @MalcolmSu sorry to hear you’re having problems. 
Are your two routers physically connected to each other (ethernet cable) via your network switches or directly linked to each other? If they are it would cause all sorts of problems so you would need to disable DHCP, preferably leave DHCP running on the router connected directly to your broadband.

If you could check this and feedback your findings and we will continue from there.

Good luck

Pixel

@pixel & @Marc thanks for taking the time to reply it's much appreciated.

Having a rummage around the mass of cables in the cupboard under my stairs this afternoon this is what I have discovered. Probably too much info for you but it was useful for me!  I also suspect though that this is not the whole story.

If I start with the cable service router (VM).  I can access the admin console on that at 192.168.100.1

It shows a DHCPv4 server enabled with a start address of 192.168.0.10 and 245 CPEs.

It has four ethernet ports.
#1 goes a Ubiquiti Amplifi HD Router
#2 Directly to my main Windows PC
#3 Directly to a Raspbery Pi running the home automation system
#4 to a Tp-link 5 port 1gig switch (4 of the 5 ports are occupied - see below) 

The Amplifi HD router also looks to be running a DHCP server starting at 192.168.152.100 through to 249. I can access the admin console of that router on 192.168.0.153.

It also has 4 ethernet ports (and also accesses something called a Ubiquiti Amplify MeshPoint Wifi Antenna) but only one of those ports is occupied. That goes to an HP ProCurve 2524 24-port switch of which 14 ethernet ports are occupied (I haven't yet traced any of these although I think when Fink analysed the Amplifi side of the network it will have identified these?)

The Tp-link switch has;
#1 CCTV server
#2 NAS
#3 Empty
#4 Fire Angel server
#5 the cable service router

The wifi on the cable service router is disabled. The wifi coverage in the house, therefore, is delivered by the Amplifi router.

I would quite like to tidy this up and use Fing (subscribed) to manage/analyse the network.  However, I am nervous about doing so as everything connected 'works' at the moment and I know there are a couple of key components in there that have fixed IP addresses or static leases.  However, I know what they are so could change them if required.

I suppose I come back to my original question - why did Fing give the error messages it did when scanning via the cable service router?

TIA

MalcolmSu

@pixel & @Marc thanks for taking the time to reply it's much appreciated.

Having a rummage around the mass of cables in the cupboard under my stairs this afternoon this is what I have discovered. Probably too much info for you but it was useful for me!  I also suspect though that this is not the whole story.

If I start with the cable service router (VM).  I can access the admin console on that at 192.168.100.1

It shows a DHCPv4 server enabled with a start address of 192.168.0.10 and 245 CPEs.

It has four ethernet ports.
#1 goes a Ubiquiti Amplifi HD Router
#2 Directly to my main Windows PC
#3 Directly to a Raspbery Pi running the home automation system
#4 to a Tp-link 5 port 1gig switch (4 of the 5 ports are occupied - see below) 

The Amplifi HD router also looks to be running a DHCP server starting at 192.168.152.100 through to 249. I can access the admin console of that router on 192.168.0.153.

It also has 4 ethernet ports (and also accesses something called a Ubiquiti Amplify MeshPoint Wifi Antenna) but only one of those ports is occupied. That goes to an HP ProCurve 2524 24-port switch of which 14 ethernet ports are occupied (I haven't yet traced any of these although I think when Fink analysed the Amplifi side of the network it will have identified these?)

The Tp-link switch has;
#1 CCTV server
#2 NAS
#3 Empty
#4 Fire Angel server
#5 the cable service router

The wifi on the cable service router is disabled. The wifi coverage in the house, therefore, is delivered by the Amplifi router.

I would quite like to tidy this up and use Fing (subscribed) to manage/analyse the network.  However, I am nervous about doing so as everything connected 'works' at the moment and I know there are a couple of key components in there that have fixed IP addresses or static leases.  However, I know what they are so could change them if required.

I suppose I come back to my original question - why did Fing give the error messages it did when scanning via the cable service router?

TIA

Pixel

Hi Malcolm, You appear to have inherited a complex network which probably only the original owner knows why it’s setup the way it is. For reasons best known to the person who set it up it is running two separate subnets with each running DHCP. In a standard home network this would cause horrendous & erroneous problems and ultimately cause network failure. While nothing is certain, I’m pretty sure that most of the Fingbox error messages/failures you’re experiencing will be because you have commercial network and configuration which fingbox really can’t handle. Your network could certainly be simplified to satisfy operation in the domestic environment but not without, I’m guessing, a considerable amount of reconfiguration, so as far as I can see there are two options:-

 1. If it ain’t broken don’t fix it (but bear in mind when it does go wrong, the network may be difficult to fix and may require a complete reconfiguration anyway).

 2. Start removing items & reconfigure the network for simplicity. This would require some planning and involve devices going offline for a while. If it was me I would take option 1 and spend some time planning my next move paying particular attention to maintaining the cctv operation and removing 1 router.

Sorry this probably offers more question than answers but the problem, imho, isn’t the Fingbox as it’s trying to resolve configurations it wasn’t designed for.

@marc & @Karl_From_Fing maybe you have a few thoughts on this?

Marc

I must agree with @Pixel, for a home setup, you have a rather complex arrangement that Fing Desktop is just not built to support.  It might have been set up to separate devices for some long lost reason but I can't be sure.  I will have to defer to @Karl_From_Fing or @Michal_From_Fing for feedback or direction on this.

MalcolmSu

Thanks both for your input again.

Whilst I am initially thinking "if it ain't broke, leave alone", I would ultimately like to simplify it.

My initial thoughts are that eliminating the Amplifi router, leaving just the VM router serving both a single wired and wireless network should be possible. My only concern though is over the addition of the wifi antenna which suggests that the original (wifi) router could not cover the whole house. I believe it is possible to add an extender to a VM router.

I don't believe the Amplifi router is providing anything extra or out of the ordinary that the VM router could not provide. There was some port forwarding that I've eliminated the need for and it also provides something called Teleport for vpn tunnelling back to the home when travelling but I never use that facility.

MalcolmSu

Sorry. Thinking aloud. Is there a way to leave the two routers in place, have only one of them provide DHCP and run everything on just one subnet?  Or is that a nonsensical idea?

Marc

If you could consolidate to one and add an extender to cover the weak area (if needed), thats the simplest and best way.  Your requirements, from what I can see of what you're connecting are relatively simple.  I have 45 assorted devices on my network, including 4k TV's and I use a single network with 3 mesh nodes.  It works fine...  

The only issue I can see is that extender(s) will take up bandwidth on whatever wireless band its sharing with your other devices.  In mesh networks, most of them stand up a dedicated backhaul wireless network for node to node communications, thus avoiding taking up wireless bandwidth from your attached devices.  It might not matter for your setup and you will see this pretty quickly if its going to be an issue.

Pixel

Hi Malcolm, anything is possible but I think option 1 is still a good option, Why?

The Ubiquity Router is a sophisticated piece of kit and is highly configureable and HP ProCurve 2524 ethernet switch is a managed switch with similar levels of complexity.
As remote commentators we can only speculate on how those devices have been configured. The original user had some specific requirements to go to the trouble and expense of installing them and I think any changes need to be planned with the probable replacement/reconfiguration of devices to simplify the whole setup.

I think you’ve been quite sensible removing port forwarding rules from a security perspective and everything is still working so leave well alone unless you’re prepared to do sufficient research on your devices and their configuration to make changes.

The alternative is to remove the Ubiquity & HP switch, then replace the HP switch with an unmanaged switch (initially connecting all the previously connected cables back to the new switch).
If after that you have wifi problems you could factory reset the ubiquity, disable DHCP and then connect it back into your network (via ethernet) to perform as a wifi extender.

edit: another thought, separate subnets may have been necessary to offer a secure network for your cctv setup, the user manual should give some clues (or google).

MalcolmSu

Thanks @Pixel


The set-up is pretty reliable and my networking knowledge is not strong so I think leaving alone is probably for the best right now. Occasionally having the two subnets causes a problem - for example, I would love to be able to control the whole house music system (Sonos) from my PC but it's on the wireless subnet and the PC is wired. However, with voice control, I can usually achieve what I need. :-)

Thanks again for all your help and insights.

Pixel

Hi Malcolm, if you’re looking for music control over the network then Roon might be worth a try, it’s not cheap but unsurpassed for control & work with sonos. Try it before you buy as your network may cause problems but Roon is very flexible.

https://roonlabs.com/

MalcolmSu

Thanks very much for that @Pixel. It looks amazing - especially when paired with the Nucleus.  Outwith my price range though. :-)

Pixel

Hi Malcolm, we’re a bit off topic but ignore the nucleus part, Roon will run on almost any Windows 10 or Greater machine & most Apple “desktop” devices. The nucleus is an average computer in a nice box 😁

Marc

And the those on a budget, I believe you can run Roon on a Raspberry Pi. Of course assuming you can find one as they had been scarce.

Pixel

Hi @Marc you’re right, the pi can be used as a Roon bridge to serve a client Controller but you need a desktop (An intel I3, 5 or 7 or MAC M1 or M2 with a minimum 16GB Ram) for the core machine. Some folk use power NAS devices but they can be rather “fiddly” to set up.