SnakeEye

I'm connecting to the internet via some ADSL provider.
Upon connection, my pc receives DNS record(s) from it;
everything's working.
For privacy reasons I want to change the DNS servers to the ones
I choose by myself, at another large company.
I changed two things:
1. Enabled manual DNS in the TCP properties of network settings.
2. Wrote primary/secondary DNS in the WAN connection setting
(located in the dial-up connections list).

Neither of these help.

For no.1: my firewall log show applications start to issue two (!)
DNS requests, first to the odious ADSL provider DNS, and the second
to the first "manual" DNS in list.
For no.2: settings are just ignored by OS, only ADSL provider DNS
used.

More to this, if I specifically disable ADSL provider DNS IP address
with the firewall, or with a "route add ..." record evading this
destination, DNS refuses to work at all, doesn't issue a subsequent
request to the first manually written DNS in list.

Am I doing not enough or is this true Must-Die bugs in action?
Well, can anybody convince me to pay to such crappy-software company?

OldGrayGary

Hi SnakeEye


Check the DNS settings in your DSL/broadband modem ... put your manual settings in there if you wish ... you can then set your local network PCs to use your broadband modem as a DNS server.

Best of luck
. . . Gary

SnakeEye

Thanx, Gary, for your time.

My DLink 300T is simply acting like a bridge;
It's all about Microsoft & 3rd party software issue.
Unfortunately, WinPoET is written extremely poor;
no manual DNS settings, and even "Routing" tab settings don't work.
Can you tell me a better ADSL client?

By the way, I discovered the problem could be solved if Microsoft
were not that mad about secrecy of the VDHCP.386 calls.
I got to know how to obtain current MAC for PPP adapter,
and primary & secondary DNS by reading "\\.\VDHCP"
(all that ipconfig does), but dunno how to set them ...
Any info about
VDHCP_Set_Info
VDHCP_Request_Address
VDHCP_Media_Sense
VDHCP_Set_InfoR
would be appreciated.

OldGrayGary

Hi again


DLink 300T with standard switches/hubs
I would expect your ISP uses PPPoE or PPPoA. I usually recommend that the DSL device provided by the ISP is set to handle any PPPoE/PPPoA duties (whether or not the device has integrated routing capabilities). If you have any PPPoE/PPPoA clients setup currently on your Windows PCs, uninstall them & let the DLink 300T handle the PPPoE.

It sounds like you prefer to use Static IPs for your LAN. If you do not have a router involved in your network (if you use a standard switch or hub), you should be able to set up whatever DNS servers you wish from the Static setup tab in the 300T's configuration screens. You will need to disable the DHCP server that is built into the 300T if you plan to go Static on the LAN, and to change the network adapters configuration in Windows to their Static addresses.

DLink 300T with a router
If you have a hardware router/firewall involved in your network setup, you might have to check to see if setting the 300T to "Bridge" mode has disabled the NAT on the 300T. You can check this by looking in on the "STATUS" tab in your 300T's configuration screens. I see no indication that the NAT is in any way configurable on the 300T - if I had to guess, it looks as if it's enabled for all modes with the possible exception of bridge-mode. If the 300T does not disable its NAT function in bridge mode, you'll have to disable NAT on the router. Also, if the 300T is set to Bridge mode, why not have your router handle the PPPoE duties (most recent routers can)? You can setup Static IPs for your LAN and manual DNS settings as you prefer within the router setup screens.

Here's a link to DLink's manual for the 300T, should you not have a copy any longer --- ftp://ftp.dlink.co.uk/dsl_routers_mo...00t_manual.pdf --- notice that reference to the built-in NAT of the 300T is limited to its "modem features" section, and to a single line in the Status screen of the 300T's configuration screens.
_______________

To try to alter a software ADSL PPPoE/PPPoA client on a Windows 9x/Me PC is something I wouldn't really want to have to try -- especially if it was just to enable the use of a non-ISP DNS server. I'd rather buy a better DSL device (the recent models would bypass all this, since they often combine the duties of 'broadband-modem', router, wireless access point, and configurable hardware-firewall).

Best of luck
. . . Gary

SnakeEye

Hi again, Gary

I appreciate your efforts deeply!
Never cared about NAT, but now noticed
"...{date&time}...> Firewall NAT service started" message
at the Status/System_Log device setup section.
I'm using static IP addressing method, and no DHCP services
from the device (i.e. they're disabled).
Tried to make a test PPPoE login to my ISP by means of
the DLink 300T, the log shown a successful connection,
including assigned IP, ISP's DNSes, WAN default gateway,
but "c:\>ping.exe my_isp_wan_default_gateway_IP"
results in:
"reply from 192.168.1.1: target network unreachable"
(192.168.1.1 is the 300T)
and no internet access this way;
I decided it's enough for me to fight against these problems,
and have reverted to my proven working configuration.

Anyway, my ever wondering mind can't reconcile with
enigmas of the VDHCP.386 calls ...

OldGrayGary

Hi again


I think at this point you deserve an honorary Network+ technical certification for all the work you've put in. The setup on the 300T seems fairly dated & definitely not very user-friendly or flexible. You might try your questions about the VDHCP.386 calls in a Network or developer forum ... they'll have more experience with that than I have.

Best of luck!
. . . Gary

SnakeEye

This post is such a sequel to
http://www.techsupportforum.com/micr...rk-should.html

Anybody who knows, please tell me (& to all at this forum):
1. An ADSL client software for Win9X, better (more feature rich)
than WinPoET. (Perhaps Microsoft offers something?)
2. I know, Microsoft has discontinued support for Win98,
but is there an update to the dial-up/network related files,
for user to be able to discard ADSL ISP's primary/secondary DNS?
3. Why is the VDHCP.386 interface in black-out?
I spotted some VDHCP.SYMs on the internet, so it's not
that logically to hide the API docs, I believe ...

johnwill

I've merged the threads, please do not create multiple threads for the same issue.