Charging Station

[borski]

i got it. thanks for the help

You’d need to drill out a hole to put the rubber grommet into, and then the Ethernet port is inside the unit.

 

[DeaneG]

Funny thing, after my Lucid charging station's wifi issues, I tried connecting it by Ethernet, and that does work. But the Netgear switch port it's connected to never lit up showing a 10/100 or 1Gbps connection.

 

[DeaneG]

Lucid's customer care relayed a request to try changing my home LAN subnet from 192.168.1.xxx to 192.168.2.xxx to solve my charging station's wifi communication problem. I did, and now the LHCS works fine over my home wifi. The manufacturer indicated that there is a conflict in the unit's firmware that they will address in a future release.

 

[borski]

Lucid's customer care relayed a request to try changing my home LAN subnet from 192.168.1.xxx to 192.168.2.xxx to solve my charging station's wifi communication problem. I did, and now the LHCS works fine over my home wifi. The manufacturer indicated that there is a conflict in the unit's firmware that they will address in a future release.

Fascinating. Mine is on a 192.168.0.xxx so that would make sense why mine worked.

 

[Bel]

Lucid's customer care relayed a request to try changing my home LAN subnet from 192.168.1.xxx to 192.168.2.xxx to solve my charging station's wifi communication problem. I did, and now the LHCS works fine over my home wifi. The manufacturer indicated that there is a conflict in the unit's firmware that they will address in a future release.

You could also have changed the subnet mask from what i think you must have had 255.255.255.0 to 255.255.252.0 (or for using the cidr notation /22). The latter spans, in your case, addresses 192.168.0.0 through 192.168.3.255. The mask 255.255.255.0 only spans / can only reach / can only talk to 256 addresses, and they also need to be within, for your case, 192.168.1.0 through 192.168.1.255 range. This isnt a conflict per se but how all Ethernet works. The subnet mask gives range with which devices can reach each other. Thus, also follows that if you have more than 256 devices (really only 254 because 0 and 255 are for "special puposes") you need to increase the mssk from the "most basic" 255.255.255.0 to something larger.

 

[DeaneG]

You could also have changed the subnet mask from what i think you must have had 255.255.255.0 to 255.255.252.0 (or for using the cidr notation /22). The latter spans, in your case, addresses 192.168.0.0 through 192.168.3.255. The mask 255.255.255.0 only spans / can only reach / can only talk to 256 addresses, and they also need to be within, for your case, 192.168.1.0 through 192.168.1.255 range. This isnt a conflict per se but how all Ethernet works. The subnet mask gives range with which devices can reach each other. Thus, also follows that if you have more than 256 devices (really only 254 because 0 and 255 are for "special puposes") you need to increase the mssk from the "most basic" 255.255.255.0 to something larger.

Thanks for the explanation! I somehow managed to avoid understanding networking very well through a 30-year EE career, including designing an Ethernet interface into a product ca. 1992. Fortunately others did.

My current wifi router is pretty basic other than providing high throughput - it won't let me create subnets beyond a main and guest network, and I'd already found the LHCS wouldn't talk on my guest network for some reason either.

 

[HariK]

Thanks for the explanation! I somehow managed to avoid understanding networking very well through a 30-year EE career, including designing an Ethernet interface into a product ca. 1992. Fortunately others did.

My current wifi router is pretty basic other than providing high throughput - it won't let me create subnets beyond a main and guest network, and I'd already found the LHCS wouldn't talk on my guest network for some reason either.

These days most wifi devices act as a master and connect to your phone or tablet and then ask which wifi network they should connect to as a dhcp client ssid and password or if you want to connect to the same network as your phone or tablet. Then they disconnect from your phone or tablet and connect to where you specify. Some old school devices want a static ip address. I am surprised that lucid device is old school.

 

[DeaneG]

These days most wifi devices act as a master and connect to your phone or tablet and then ask which wifi network they should connect to as a dhcp client ssid and password or if you want to connect to the same network as your phone or tablet. Then they disconnect from your phone or tablet and connect to where you specify. Some old school devices want a static ip address. I am surprised that lucid device is old school.

Lucid's device does the former - it's happy being a DHCP client. No need for a static address but it can if desired.

 

[Bel]

Lucid's device does the former - it's happy being a DHCP client. No need for a static address but it can if desired.

Perhaps Lucid dhcp isnt smart enough but picked an ip already in use or static. Quite a few low volume or cost devices may still only do static and where the subnet mask is only 255.255.255.0 but not changeable or even viewable by user. As an aside, you can have both wifi and lan (devices) with some static and some dhcp on the same network and spanning one for or more subnets, multiples of 256 addresses. For example, in my office i have lan/cable 1Gb and with static addresses for highest possible speed (gives ~15%extra) (some do 2.5 Gb) and where the same devices also have 1Gb wifi dhcp for "normal traffic" -- all on the same network.

 

[HariK]

A dumb dhcp I have had 192.168.2.14 address. I had to manually connect a computer to it and give a static ip address 192.168.2.1 to the computer and use a wire to connect to it. Open the browser and connect to 192..168.2.14. Then I was able to change it to 192.168.1.14. Save and restart. I used a wire to connect it to my network. This device is 2008 vintage. A cheap tp link wifi controlled outlet costing $12 retail these days acts as a master and I connect to it with my phone and I tell it to connect to my network. Lucid could easily do that.

 

[DeaneG]

Perhaps Lucid dhcp isnt smart enough but picked an ip already in use or static. Quite a few low volume or cost devices may still only do static and where the subnet mask is only 255.255.255.0 but not changeable or even viewable by user. As an aside, you can have both wifi and lan (devices) with some static and some dhcp on the same network and spanning one for or more subnets, multiples of 256 addresses. For example, in my office i have lan/cable 1Gb and with static addresses for highest possible speed (gives ~15%extra) (some do 2.5 Gb) and where the same devices also have 1Gb wifi dhcp for "normal traffic" -- all on the same network.

Lucid's unit (LHCS) was negotiating DHCP just give with my router. Both the LHCS and the router agreed that the LHCS was on my network on the reserved IP address I had assigned. But the LHCS just wouldn't communicate after that. From what the manufacturer said, and the contents of a logfile I downloaded from the LHCS, the LHCS had some possibly hard-coded address for comm or test that conflicted. I in the LHCS's logfile, I saw a reference to an internal VPN port at 192.168.1.10, which happened to be the reserved address of a smarthome hub I use.

 

[DeaneG]

... A cheap tp link wifi controlled outlet costing $12 retail these days acts as a master and I connect to it with my phone and I tell it to connect to my network. Lucid could easily do that.

That's pretty much how Lucid's unit works.

 

[HariK]

That's pretty much how Lucid's unit works.

Then why does it want a particular static ip address 192.168.2.x? If it is true dhcp client, it should accept the address provided by any dhcp server.

 

[DeaneG]

Then why does it want a particular static ip address 192.168.2.x? If it is true dhcp client, it should accept the address provided by any dhcp server.

It does not want a particular static IP address and does take its address from a dhcp server. It just doesn't like being on a subnet that is 192.168.1.xxx. Apparently at least 192.168.0.xxx works as well as 192.168.2.xxx. Just not 192.168.1.xxx as there appears to be some internal addressing that is in conflict with this. So I set my DHCP server to dispense address in the 192.168.2.xxx range and poof, the LHCS works now.

 

[HariK]

It does not want a particular static IP address and does take its address from a dhcp server. It just doesn't like being on a subnet that is 192.168.1.xxx. Apparently at least 192.168.0.xxx works as well as 192.168.2.xxx. Just not 192.168.1.xxx as there appears to be some internal addressing that is in conflict with this. So I set my DHCP server to dispense address in the 192.168.2.xxx range and poof, the LHCS works now.

I see. That is still a problem because there are other devices which many of us usually have on 192.168.1.x and the DHCP server is 192.18.1.1 and usually allocates addresses 192.168..1.2 to 255. Most consumer routers are like that. Most consumer DHCP clients usually accept any address in the range 192.168.x.x. I have a print server which needs a static IP address and also a security camera. So, in my case, I would have to change 2 other clients to switch to 192.168.2.x. The only other choice consumers have would be double DHCP where the cable modem/router (ATT Fiber modem in my case) is 192.168.2.x with wifi enabled connected to my TP link mesh router which acts as 192.168.1.x DHCP server for a separate wireless netlwork.

 

[DeaneG]

I see. That is still a problem because there are other devices which many of us usually have on 192.168.1.x and the DHCP server is 192.18.1.1 and usually allocates addresses 192.168..1.2 to 255. Most consumer routers are like that. Most consumer DHCP clients usually accept any address in the range 192.168.x.x. I have a print server which needs a static IP address and also a security camera. So, in my case, I would have to change 2 other clients to switch to 192.168.2.x. ...

Agreed - the LHCS not currently working on 192.168.1.xxx is a problem as most consumer routers start there. I have about twenty devices or corresponding clients which need fixed IP addresses to interact properly. It took me an hour or so to switch everything over to 192.168.2.xxx. I think it's all working again now.

I'm sure the LHCS OEM will address this soon via software update. But I'll leave my network at 192.168.2.xxx.

 

[HariK]

Agreed - the LHCS not currently working on 192.168.1.xxx is a problem as most consumer routers start there. I have about twenty devices or corresponding clients which need fixed IP addresses to interact properly. It took me an hour or so to switch everything over to 192.168.2.xxx. I think it's all working again now.

I'm sure the LHCS OEM will address this soon via software update. But I'll leave my network at 192.168.2.xxx.

Yes. That must have been a lot of pain. I totally agree that there is no need for you to change from 192.168.2.x at this point unless of course yet another device will force a change. Let us hope not.

 

[dawktah LucidGT]

I'm going to monitor this.

 

[HariK]

I'm going to monitor this.

Monitor what?

 

[dawktah LucidGT]

Monitor what?

Progress of firmware, will order unit after this is fixed.