Correct. This is simply the range that can be used by the DHCP service on the router.


Correct again. Due to differences in the sematic interpretation of "static IP address", some products/vendors will specifically require a listed static IPs to be within the DHCP service range, where others will specifically require them to be outside it. Hopefully your router (or DHCP server) will warn you if you try to do the "wrong" thing.

Evohome,

This is my one and only handle. I don't have another handle. I just signed up yesterday. That was my first post after reading various posts on this board for years.

Why would what you typed get me pisssed? I don't know you and really your words do not offend me. It takes a lot to piss me off, but reading posts on a message board is not one of them.

Remember, it's just a remote, not life or death.

Also, thanks for actually contributing a solution for the original poster. That is the reason for this forum, to exchange problems and solutions. So, while you failed at trying to 'piss' me off, you did at least help someone, which was the point of the second half of my original post.

Cheers!

itisonlyaremote,

So, you having been reading posts on this board for years but never saw fit to offer any help or advice to anyone during those years. And then you decided that the best subject for your first post was an attack on people who do provide such advice. That, man, is weird.

I also note that, unusually, you have refused to enter your email address into your profile. That is also weird.

Your second post is just as weird. As you say, "the reason for this forum [is] to exchange problems and solutions", but the irony is that this is exactly what you have not been doing "for years" whilst it is exactly what the rest of us have been doing.

I think it would be best all round if you simply go dormant again.

Thanks Guy for validating the second part of my initial post. I'm not surprised that someone else would reply with nonsense at this point, even though the original issue posted by vdUnknown was resolved. I will not re-address this thread after this post goes up, so please save your replies.....

Considering my original Pronto remote (TSU1000) is out of production and years old, there really isn't much for me to post about that isn't already known. I just got my hands on a TSU9400 over the weekend and decided to join the forum as I thought I could help a poster. You're right, that I should have joined sooner as I have gotten good knowledge from this board in the past. I didn't, and I know realize that I should try to contribute as a way to 'payback' for the help I have gotten by searching this forum.

You too, Guy, please remember, it's just a remote, not life or death. Take a deep breath and relax.... Enjoy life!

I'll take your last suggestion under advisement.

Cheers!

The second part of your initial post had no point. It was just abusive, plain and simple. It was also directed against someone who has helped more people on this forum than just about anyone else and, as such, was ignorant as well as well as abusive.

Finally, you seem to have a hangup about "it's just a remote, not life or death". Did I ever suggest the contrary? The implication seems to be that anyone who finds something interesting should chill out and party instead. More weirdness.

I just had exactly the same problem. Tried (almost) everything, and could only get the TSU9600 to communicate if the WLAN was wide open. I was just about to order a 100$ router to set up a open "pronto"-network when I checked the forum. Glad I did - it`s working fine now after I enabled G-network only. Mixed does not work. Thanks guys!

BTW. The router is D-Link DIR-655

I guess I just have to take my chance with WEP until Philips releases firmware with WPA....

No problem at all. Kind of a pain in the ass to not have N active on my laptops just so I can use my controller though...

You know what? When itsa actually starts to put that 9400 configuration together, he will have questions. Maybe then he will start to realize the complexity of the pro remotes (and the number of moving parts/pieces in the setup including network configuration) to understand why I posted my original set of questions.

If his post was indeed directed at me, then so be it. I did a short post because "it does not work" is really not enough information for anyone to solve the problem, especially one involving networks.

I posted my initial response because I cannot count the number of threads in this forum that target network problems and expected that one of them would lead to the solution. The end-all solution was moving from mixed mode go G-Only. I'm glad the user is up and running as that is the end goal.

Am I upset? No! The user just spent several days of round-tripping that might have been saved by reading a few of the threads.