dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1360
share rss forum feed


disconnected

@snet.net

MVP HOSTS file Blocking Access to Linksys Router Config

Click for full size
I installed the latest HOSTS file on my new Windows 7 64-bit installation. Since doing so, I can only access the main page of my Linksys. Accessing other pages results in a LONG wait, followed by incomplete page load as shown above.

There are a couple of entries that begin with 192.168.1 in the HOSTS file and I was wondering if one of the entries is blocking some of the router pages?

I can access the router from Windows XP without delays. Windows XP has an older HOSTS file from a few years back.

I'm also noticing very slow web page loads with the new HOSTS file. Some sites, like Facebook 'pages' don't load completely, and if left alone for a while, turn black the entire client area of the browser. This is with IE9.

I've setup a static IP for the PC and turned off DNS and DHCP services as recommended by MVP's site to remedy slowdowns, but the internet is still very slow and access to the Linksys router is unusable. Conversely, I have no problem accessing the 2Wire gateway's config menu. I don't know why one would work and the other would not. Any ideas?


ZZZZZZZ
Premium
join:2001-05-27
PARADISE
kudos:1
Did you read the instructions for W7..........using the bat file?
--
Sarcasm is the body’s natural defense against stupidity.

redwolfe_98
Premium
join:2001-06-11
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable

1 edit
reply to disconnected
i know about turning off the "DNS client" service but i don't know about turning off the "DHCP client" service.. i would re-enable the "DHCP client" service..

on my windows xp computer, the "DHCP client" service is set to "automatic"..

if you are using a small HOSTS file, disabling the "DNS client" service isn't necessary but it is necessary when using a large HOSTS file..

if you think some entries in the HOSTS file are causing a problem, you can remove them from the HOSTS file.. or you could try removing the whole winhelp2002 HOSTS file and restoring the default HOSTS file..

here is a link to the winhelp2002 HOSTS file:

»winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.txt

i am not seeing that anything-"192.x.x.x" is in it..

OZO
Premium
join:2003-01-17
kudos:2
reply to disconnected
hosts file doesn't block connections. It provides local name resolution service: name -> IP address.
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself...


disconnected

@snet.net
reply to redwolfe_98
I used the bat file to install.

But here's something interesting: I installed Google Chrome just now, and Chrome has no trouble accessing the Linksys router menus. So the problem appears to be a compatibility issue between IE and the router's pages.

IE also cannot finish loading certain web pages, like Facebook pages (not personal page, but business/org pages), and it won't load support.microsoft.com web pages. It stalls at the top banner and won't load any further. Google Chrome seems okay though. Must be some security setting in IE set too high..

HELLFIRE
Premium
join:2009-11-25
kudos:18
reply to disconnected
said by disconnected :

There are a couple of entries that begin with 192.168.1 in the HOSTS file and I was wondering if one of the entries is blocking some of the router pages?

Want to point them out from your hosts file? As others have said, 192.168.x.x doesn't show up in the hosts file,
and the 192.168.x.x range isn't something you should be seeing on the public internet; look up RFC1918 address
space on your search engine of choice.

Regards

dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8

2 recommendations

He's probably talking about these:


127.0.0.1 192.168.112.2o7.net
127.0.0.1 192.168.122.2o7.net


where '192....' is part of the name, not the address


MiNdErAsR
Dark Lord of Sriracha

join:2000-11-25
reply to disconnected
Maybe a silly question, but did you allow the connection through NoScript?


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
reply to disconnected
I think you are on the right page.
Try resetting to default in IE and see if it works then.

Internet Options - Advanced - Reset
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke



siljaline
I'm lovin' that double wide
Premium
join:2002-10-12
Montreal, QC
kudos:17
Reviews:
·Bell Sympatico
Good suggestion:
»windows.microsoft.com/en-us/wind···plorer-9
The folks over at: »Linksys may be aware of this.
I do own at 2Wire Router and am not seeing any of the reported issues.

Jrb2
Premium
join:2001-08-31
kudos:3

1 recommendation

reply to dave
said by disconnected :

-snip-

There are a couple of entries that begin with 192.168.1 in the HOSTS file

-snip-

said by dave:

He's probably talking about these:


127.0.0.1 192.168.112.2o7.net
127.0.0.1 192.168.122.2o7.net


where '192....' is part of the name, not the address

Exactly Dave. Those are entries in the MVPS HOSTS file. I don't know when they were added (the OP said he/she was using an older HOSTS file from a few years back on XP without problems).
I don't know either whether that is the only issue on his/her system.

BTW there is also a Linksys forum here:
»Linksys
(I don't know whether cross-posting is allowed in this case).

dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8
Yes, but an entry for the name 192.168.112.2o7.net can have no effect on him connecting to the address 192.168.1.1 (or any other address).

OZO
Premium
join:2003-01-17
kudos:2
reply to MiNdErAsR
said by MiNdErAsR:

Maybe a silly question, but did you allow the connection through NoScript?

I think just an opposite - it's a good question.

If there is a filter, blocking JS in those (including main) pages, it should be voided. For example. my Proxomitron filter has bypass rule for the router's IP. Routers usually require JS in order to support configuration changes in them.
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself...

Jrb2
Premium
join:2001-08-31
kudos:3
reply to dave
said by dave:

Yes, but an entry for the name 192.168.112.2o7.net can have no effect on him connecting to the address 192.168.1.1 (or any other address).

You're absolutely right, Dave, without any doubt!

And to be honest: I should have made that more clear in my post while I did know it. Instead my post might have caused more confusion which I do regret.