Your Universal Remote Control Center
RemoteCentral.com
Philips iPronto Forum - View Post
Previous section Next section Previous page Next page Up level
Up level
The following page was printed from RemoteCentral.com:

Login:
Pass:
 
 

Page 1 of 2
Topic:
iPronto, wireless network and NetX
This thread has 16 replies. Displaying posts 1 through 15.
Post 1 made on Wednesday April 14, 2004 at 07:21
harmelzinga
Lurking Member
Joined:
Posts:
April 2004
6
I've got the following problem.
The iPronto can reach my access point, at least most of the time. The NetX is quite near the access point. When my accesspoint is turned off, my iPronto cann't reach my NetX (so I thought the netX is reached through the accesspoint). Now here is the problem: Many times the iPronto cann't reach the netX.

Has anyone had the same problem's? Can someone verify the thought about the netX is reached throught the accespoint?

I'm lost...

Harm

p.s. The strange thing is you can configure the netX while the accesspoint is powered down. Just not reach it. (It's not in the list)
Post 2 made on Wednesday April 14, 2004 at 10:20
Kees van der Meer
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
December 2003
162
Beste Harm,

Het klopt inderdaad dat (RF)commando's vanaf de iPronto verzonden, via de WAP door de NetX worden ontvangen.
De WAP moet aan staan om herkend te worden door de iPronto. Controleer eerst of je verbinding hebt met je WAP: hou de transparante systeem-volumeknop ongeveer 3 seconden ingedrukt en controleer de signaalsterkte op de "STATUS" pagina.

Controleer ook even of het apparaat dat je wil bedienen via de NetX wel als "RF" opgegeven is in iPronto editor. Alleen als "RF" is geselecteerd worden RF-signalen door de NetX omgezet naar "IR".

Succes,
Kees
Post 3 made on Friday April 16, 2004 at 12:50
Barry Gordon
Founding Member
Joined:
Posts:
August 2001
2,153
Kees, an english translation please?

I am pretty sure that for IR work, the communications between the ipronto and the NetX is not through the wireless (wi-fi) network. I say this because I put a sniffer on the wired side of the wireless network (same subnet as the access point is plugged into) and watched the traffic. There was UDP traffic (multicast if I remember right) when the iPronto was looking for the Netx and configring it, Same is true of the iProntoEdit running on a PC. When the iPronto was talking to the NetX to send IR, there was no IP (TCP or UDP) traffic seen on the network. My conclusion was that for wireless RF to the NetX for purposes of IR generation, the Wireless network is not used. The NetX operates just like other Philips wireless RF to IR devices (e.g. Philips RX77) with a carrier around 417 khz. I wish Philips would describe what is going on. It is too bad Philips has such a closed mind. They should look at TiVo a very successful open minded company or Roku a company with a similar view point. Roku even describes the details of their IR protocol which happens to be the NEC protocol giving timing and coding. All companies should do that.
OP | Post 4 made on Monday April 19, 2004 at 01:56
harmelzinga
Lurking Member
Joined:
Posts:
April 2004
6
For Barry:

In short Kees says: The communications to the NetX goes through the WAP (Wireless access point). Check your connection with the WAP and you should put the settings for the device to RF instead of IR.

So no help there.... :-(

Voor Kees: (translation follows)

Beste Kees,

Het vreemde is juist dat het soms wel werkt (oftewel de instelling voor RF staat goed en de verbinding is verder ook mogelijk). Hoe kan het dan dat ik regelmatig wel kan internetten op de iPronto (geen cache!) en dat de netX toch niet werkt?!? De conclusie van Barry lijkt me na deze "vondst" logischer. Misschien heb je nog een andere verklaring? Alle hulp is erg welkom!

Met vriendelijke groet, Harm

Translation:

The odd thing is: sometimes everything works perfectly (so the settings for IR/RF are correct and a connection is possible). So how is it possible (if the connection goes through the WAP) there are moment, I can connect to the internet (no cache!) and cann't connect to the netX? The conclusion Barry found seems more plausible. Any help is welcome.

Regards, Harm
Post 5 made on Monday April 19, 2004 at 10:00
Kees van der Meer
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
December 2003
162
Harm,

Today the problem as you described also occurs at my home.
This morning the electrician had to cut off all power because of the installation of three X10 Filter/Couplers (I have a three phase system).

After power up again, my iPronto found the NetX but it didn't send any signal to the IR devices which it's connected with. I had to reconfigure the NetX.
After I renamed my NetX (NetX1, I have two NetX's in the house)I had to reboot my iPronto. The reboot was necessary because it still didn't work!

So could it be that you have the NetX connected to a group that doesn't has power for 24h per day? Also do you use more than 1 NetX's? Because in my case
my settings got lost. Both devices were named as "NetX" instead of "NetX1" and "NetX2". So they were conflicting.


Barry,

Are you saying that Communications with the NetX don't go through wireless network? Are you aware that you normally can "PING" the NetX?


Kees

Post 6 made on Monday April 19, 2004 at 14:57
Andrew Dade
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
March 2004
134
I can ping my NetX even without my ipronto working... It also returns a MAC address in my connected devices list of my WAP.

At least I still can have some fun while I wait for my ipronto to be sorted... :-(
Post 7 made on Monday April 19, 2004 at 15:40
Barry Gordon
Founding Member
Joined:
Posts:
August 2001
2,153
The netX is a fully compliant wireless network device, hence it responds to a ping. It also responds to other commands of an IP nature, specifically as I recall to UDP packets involving multicast configuration to allow broadcast messages to be set to multiple NetX devices.

My statement is that after all configuration is done, and all the iPronto wants to do is make the NetX put out IR by sending RF out from the iPronto, it does NOT involve the Wi-Fi wireless network. It talks directly to the NetX using RF in the same manner as a ProntoPro talked to its RF to IR bridge.

No one has been able to convince me I am incorrect. I came to this conclusion by having a sniffer on the LAN which had the Wireless AP connected to it. There was no IP traffic when the iPronto sent RF to the NetX to be converted to IR. I only wish there was.
Post 8 made on Tuesday April 27, 2004 at 09:36
Dave Houston
RF Expert
Joined:
Posts:
October 2001
1,521
You might take a look at the Global Cachè GC-100.
  • [Link: globalcache.com]
    It is a network (wired) device that has multiple IR outputs.
  • OP | Post 9 made on Wednesday April 28, 2004 at 02:29
    harmelzinga
    Lurking Member
    Joined:
    Posts:
    April 2004
    6
    Barry I think your right. I've moved the NetX to a different position. I've placed it a little higher, now it seems to work.
    Post 10 made on Wednesday April 28, 2004 at 09:50
    Dave Houston
    RF Expert
    Joined:
    Posts:
    October 2001
    1,521
    On 04/19/04 15:40, Barry Gordon said...

    My statement is that after all configuration is
    done, and all the iPronto wants to do is make
    the NetX put out IR by sending RF out from the
    iPronto, it does NOT involve the Wi-Fi wireless
    network. It talks directly to the NetX using
    RF in the same manner as a ProntoPro talked to
    its RF to IR bridge.

    So you are saying that WiFi is only used to configure the NTX6400 and thereafter an iPronto communicates with it using 2.4GHz RF and a proprietary protocol? That's an awfully expensive way to do it. Philips tends to charge 10x what a device costs but, in this case, you're saying they're paying through the nose just to be able to configure the device via WiFi. Seems out of character for Philips.

    They must use a peer-to-peer WiFi link for IR. There would seem to be no need for an IP address otherwise.

    Of course, if the IR code is not sent via the WAP or wireless router then the GC-100 isn't likely to work. The GC-100 has to be on the wired LAN and needs a TCP string sent to its IP address. There may be a way to do this with a web page and forms.

    Unless you need the addressability of multiple extenders, a pair of Powermids would make far more sense in terms of cost.
    Post 11 made on Friday April 30, 2004 at 10:29
    Dave Houston
    RF Expert
    Joined:
    Posts:
    October 2001
    1,521
    On 04/28/04 09:50, Dave Houston said...
    They must use a peer-to-peer WiFi link for IR.
    There would seem to be no need for an IP address
    otherwise.

    Instead of peer-to-peer I should have used the term ad hoc. In infrastructure mode, 802.11B units need a WAP or wireless router. In ad hoc mode, units communicate directly. The iPronto probably uses ad hoc mode when sending codes to NTX6400 units.

    Post 12 made on Wednesday May 5, 2004 at 08:56
    AudioCowboy
    Lurking Member
    Joined:
    Posts:
    May 2004
    6
    i have the same problem
    the netx doesnt receive the ipronto commands at times
    even if im standing in front of the rack where the netx is that leads me to think that the signal travels thru the wap. It does start working on its own after a few tries or if i take out the power to the netx and turn it back on in essence reseting it.
    So im confused if the ipronto talks to the netx in ad hoc then it should work when im standing right in front of it.


    This message was edited by AudioCowboy on 05/05/04 09:55.
    OP | Post 13 made on Tuesday May 18, 2004 at 07:31
    harmelzinga
    Lurking Member
    Joined:
    Posts:
    April 2004
    6
    Last week I tried contacting Philips about this problem, when I discovered something else. The led NetX normally is yellow/orange and blinks when receiving a "package" and sending the corresponding IR-code. Sometimes however, the led keeps green. Sometimes it turns yellow/orange again after about 5 minutes, and sometimes I've to reset the NetX. I'm going to try to replace the NetX and upgrade the firmware of the iPronto (they say this release is a lot more stable, on the network side) next monday.

    I'll report back with my findings.

    Regards, Harm Elzinga
    Post 14 made on Tuesday May 18, 2004 at 10:57
    Barry Gordon
    Founding Member
    Joined:
    Posts:
    August 2001
    2,153
    I forgot about ad hoc - That is a distinct possibility. As to why would Philips make something IP compliant and not fully use it - well that begs a lot of questions about Philips, its customer support, it's technical savy, lessons learned and marketing model. My current example is the hard button for channel up down on the iPronto. They got it right on every prior Pronto model, i.e. it can not be global as most Home Theaters have more than one device that tunes channels. On the ipronto it is global and that is about as stupid a design decision as I have come across.

    I have removed almost all 2.4 GHZ phone from my house (in favor of 5 gig) and that greatly improved wifi operations in my house. The only 2.4 Gig phone I have is the B&O 800 which is a work of art, not a phone.

    With regard to marketing model and customer support, they need to look at companies like Tivo and Roku; not companies like Sony and Pioneer. Tivo and Roku built platforms based on Linux and GNU; and then capitalized on it by supporting the user community at large with BBS presence (two way presence) and encouraging / supporting ad hoc enhancements and development.

    I am fully disgusted with Philips as a company, but do like some of their products. I use my iPronto as a simple but very pretty, and very very expensive IR remote no RF for the obvious reasons no EPG for the same reasons, just a high class toy with a future full of promises being broken on a regular basis. i guess they never heard the concepts of "Setting Customer Expectations". Whoops i should not say that but rather they just do not believe they need to meet the customers expectations that they themselves set!
    Post 15 made on Monday July 12, 2004 at 18:22
    brunner
    Lurking Member
    Joined:
    Posts:
    June 2004
    9
    On 05/05/04 08:56, AudioCowboy said...
    i have the same problem

    the netx doesnt receive the ipronto commands at
    times
    even if im standing in front of the rack where
    the netx is that leads me to think that the signal
    travels thru the wap. It does start working on
    its own after a few tries or if i take out the
    power to the netx and turn it back on in essence
    reseting it.
    So im confused if the ipronto talks to the netx
    in ad hoc then it should work when im standing
    right in front of it.

    Did you ever find a solution to this problem? I'm having the same problem. iPronto talks to NetX from 2 ft away with cabinet door open, but not with cabinet door closed. With performance like that, I'm better off dumping the NetX and just using IR.
    Page 1 of 2


    Jump to


    Protected Feature Before you can reply to a message...
    You must first register for a Remote Central user account - it's fast and free! Or, if you already have an account, please login now.

    Please read the following: Unsolicited commercial advertisements are absolutely not permitted on this forum. Other private buy & sell messages should be posted to our Marketplace. For information on how to advertise your service or product click here. Remote Central reserves the right to remove or modify any post that is deemed inappropriate.

    Hosting Services by ipHouse