Jump to content
Light-O-Rama Forums

I'm Having Some E1.31 Issues... Anyone Want To Help?


coasterbp

Recommended Posts

Are you trying to run your pixels wirelessly?

There has been a lot of discussion on whether or not this will work. Chances are very good it is not going to. Several reasons...

There is a lot of data being transmitted through a typical network. Forget about the traffic for the lights, you also have your internet connections, other computers, mobile devices, etc. All are fighting for connections. Add in the data necessary pixel controller and it gets fishy.

Next, chances are very good there are a ton of wireless routers in your area. There are usually only 3 channels most residential routers are using. Those 3 channels fill up quickly. That makes it even harder to transmit the data.

Have you tried wiring this directly into your router or switch?

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is using a single cable directly between the pc and e681. But when the wireless NIC is added for unrelated network acess, it was becoming the preferred route for multicast. So adding a better static route for multicast to the wired NIC solved the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had to do a little more research about -p. Windows is not a platform that I have a lot of sysadmin experience with, and I usually install it in places and ways that only have a single NIC. It does look like this should cause windows to add the route to the registry so that it will return after a reboot. So the command would start:

route -p add .....

As far as the metric 5, windows (and most operating systems) allows for multiple routes to be in the table for the same destination. From Windows perspective, the one with the lowest metric is the best one to use. So in theory, if this interface with a route of weight 5 went down, the system would now start sending the multicast out the interface that has the next highest metric. This doesn't really add anything for our purposes, except it shows that you need a static route for the multicast that is lower than any other existing route for the multicast range.

In theory, you could even add static routes for individual universe multicast addresses, selecting which universes go out each each interface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...