e 4200 v1 not connecting to synology NAS

[EricR]

Hi Everyone

I'm new to the forum and relatively new to home networking so I'll make my apologies now ;-)

I have just bought an e4200 in an attempt to upgrade my wrt610 v2 thats been running for a couple of years. The issue is that while I can connect to the internet with the 4200 I cannot connect to My Synology ds411+ NAS using that channel. Using the internal ip adress connecting to the NAS is no problem. I've checked and rechecked the settings as per the same with the wrt 610 which has no connection issues and still no joy. I've tried cisco support who are pretty useless to be honest.

Any clues as to what I'm missing here? Its taken 2 days so far and no joy.

Despite all the relatively good reviews of the 4200 im beginning to wonder if I made the right decision in buying it..;-)

Cheers

 

[stevech]

Unlikely to be a faulty router.. will probably prove to be a configuration setting is missing...

Please clarify: "Using the internal ip adress connecting to the NAS is no problem."

a) does this mean that a PC can use the NAS if you tell the PC (browser) to connect to the LAN address, such as 192.168.1.250, where .250 is what you chose to assign to the NAS as a static IP address?

Or

b) did you use a "UNC" path to access the NAS, such as entering //DS411 in the browser's address/url path?

If you succeeded with (b) but failed with (a), perhaps you simply didn't give the NAS a static LAN IP address- and due to DHCP, it will change now and then?

Or

c) Are you saying you cannot use your ISP-assigned public IP address and access the NAS?

 

[EricR]

Thanks for the very quick reply and sorry for the lack of tech knowledege here.

The answer to question a is yes.
Havent tried b
I think the answer to question c is yes


I use dyndns.org to access the NAS over the net if that makes a difference.

The wrt 610 has no connection issues - just swap the routers over and its back to normal.

Cheers

 

[overdrive31]

The WRT610 probably has UPnP enabled, and on the E4200 it could be disabled, but this is a good thing. UPnP enabled on router is a bit unsafe, but manually port forwarding port 80 tcp needed for My Synology should fix it and keep your network safe. You might try the NAS firmware EZ-Internet feature to configure your router or you could put the NAS in the DMZ, but when you're wanting only to gain remote management, would be a bad idea, it opens all services the NAS provides to the internet. In contrast UPnP exposes every device that utilizes it to the internet, port forwarding gives you better control and security, but requires manual rule creation.

 

[EricR]

Thanks for that..both have UpNP available. I'm goin to also check the dyndns settings as well and see if that makes a difference - is it possible that as the NAS was set up with the WRT610 it could be 'stuck' on an ip address? dyndns is not enabled at router level on either machine. All the port forwarding is the same as the wrt 610 and yet the 4200 still doesnt want to connect. I've double checked all the settings between the 2 hence I would have thought that what was good for one would be good for the other. I'll certainly try what you have suggested as this is also very helpful indeed.
Many thanks and I'll keep you posted - much appreciated.
Cheers

 

[EricR]

sorry - one more thing I've tried to find the LAN throughput speed of the 4200 vs the 610. I'm guessing the 4200 must be a fair bit faster. Is that the case?

Many thanks again...

 

[overdrive31]

How are you managing DynDNS? Have you updated your host address since a possible IP renewal? You should probably enable DynDNS management on the router, so it doesn't require user interaction.

Did you try the EZ-Internet feature of the NAS firmware to assist in configuring the router?

LAN throughput, I would have to assume so, the E4200 is leaps ahead of previous generation routers namely the E3000 which is about on par with the WRT610. Strange too, the hardware is so similar.

 

[EricR]

Hi

Many thanks for your help - finally figured it out - was the dyndns setting. On the 610 this did not need to be enable for some reason and it worked fine - but on the 4200 it does. All the port forwarding is the same on both which seems to be ok which leads me to another question. with dyndns on and port forwarding is there a security risk?
Also, not sure if this is the right place to aske but my apple TV does not seem to see the net since the router change..would that be to do with port forwarding?

Many thanks again

Cheers

 

[overdrive31]

You shouldn't have to worry about security as long as the password to the NAS is strong enough not to be brute forced and the only port forward is for NAS remote management. Too many ports open that do not need to be, device in DMZ, UPnP enabled, or WAN ping block disabled(allows you to be port scanned) could be considered as a security risk.

If the Apple TV is functional on the local network, it could be that DNS is not setup correctly, or you might try disabling the filter multicast setting on the router, since filter multicast blocks many internet media streaming services. Will need more info on what you're experiencing to help any further.

 

[stevech]

Has anyone run a port scan or intrusion attack against Synology's DSM 3.2 to confirm that there are no inadvertently enabled ports/services?

 

[EricR]

Great advice as usual - shall go and check as suggested...;-)

The swiitch that the apple tV is connected to also runs a ryan media player and samsung DVD player. The DVD player connects to the internet no problem - the ryan appears to connect ok but cannot get to youtube which is strange..all devices appear to have the correct network settings..

This set up is in a 3 storey house with loads of concrete...
I run the following:
ground floor: sitting room - homeplug AV connected to cisco 5 port switch (apple tv etc connected to this) kitchen - homeplug av wireless (runs netbook no problems)
1st floor - e4200 router 411+ Nas and homeplug in master bedroom running ryan mini (connected by cable)
2nd floor - homeplug av running cisco 5 port switch

I need to use the homeplugs as wireless gets killed in the place - so many blackspots - hence the homeplugs everywhere.

I'll try the router settings again and report back.

Once again many thanks for all your help here - very much appreciated.

Cheers

 

[EricR]

sorry - and yes the apple tv picks up the local network ok..

 

[overdrive31]

You might try manually entering static DNS entries on the router, rather than relying on DNS relay. Did you disable(uncheck) the filter multicast on the router? Reboot everything after making changes.

 

[EricR]

got it working... needed the everything being brought down and rebooted - strange that the other devices worked ok without that - but for now all working as should be.
Thanks very much indeed for all your help.
Next question....with the setup that I have what should be the ideal file transfer rate on the internal network - if there is such a thing. At the moment at the locations furthest away from the router (bearing in mind I use cable connections via the homeplugs I get 2.5 - 5 MBPS - not Mbps. Is that good or dreadful?

Many thanks again

Cheers

 

[overdrive31]

Speeds look normal for HomePlug AV, glad you got it all up and running, enjoy.

 

[EricR]

thanks very much for all your help. great forum and extremely knowledgeable people who really help us...great stuff n thanks again to you and the team ;-)

 

[EricR]

next question....how do I make it faster? is there a way or am I stuck without going the cat 5/6 route?

 

[overdrive31]

There are HomePlug AV2(500Mbps, Coming Soon!) products that should double the HomePlug AV(200Mbps) throughput performance. There are some Atheros based HomePlug AV devices that use twice the spectrum to produce 500Mbps which do double the throughput of the 200Mbps rated gear rather nicely. But, will the coming AV2 devices be compatible, and if they are, will these current out of spec products be fast enough to keep up with the new AV2 technology? There is also MoCA which uses coax cable rather than powerline. MoCA seems to test at higher rates than HomePlug AV and the speeds are also much more stable. HomePNA 3.1 has nice speed claims for use over coax cabling or phone line, but it can't coexist with cable internet over coax while it can coexist with DSL over phone line.