NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
rpz620
Nov 09, 2010Aspirant
WN2000RPT - Internet Access Keeps Dropping
All of my devices can continually access the WN2000RPT device and access the local network as well as the internet. However, after some time, the internet connection drops for the repeater only - I can still access the local network but not the internet.
Is there a timeout or something that would cause it to lose it's connection? Seems that bouncing the repeater works, albeit temporarily.
thanks.
Ryan
Is there a timeout or something that would cause it to lose it's connection? Seems that bouncing the repeater works, albeit temporarily.
thanks.
Ryan
192 Replies
tc26 wrote: I have installed two WN2000RPT's for two different clients both with AT&T Uverse gateways (2wire). The first installation appeared to work just fine but the client was only using it to get an iPad connected.
The second WN2000RPT installation for another client has been having all sorts of problems staying connected to the internet. It will work for a while and then lose connectivity. The problem seems to be between the extender and the router. I can always ping or browse to the extender but can't always make it all the way to the router. I have tried updating the firmware on the extender, changing the router channel and of course talking to Netgear technical support. Netgear support has not been able to come up with a solution.
Something I have noticed is that the laptops I have tested that keep dropping the internet connection are Windows 7. I have not had any problems with my personal laptop running Windows XP. After discovering this I went back over to the location where I installed the first WN2000RPT and tested a Windows 7 laptop and guess what? Yep, it started dropping the internet connection.
Has anyone else noticed that the problem seems to be with machines running Windows 7? I really think this is a firmware problem with the WN2000RPT.
i use my ibm win7_SP1 laptop with Intel 5100 laptop and it works well with 2000RPT....what is the model no. of ur wireless nic name shown in the network connections?- RafalAspirant
James_NOT_Bond wrote: wut is the name of the Router AP which the 2000RPT is connected? I use WNR3500L(latest official f/w) and it's working OK so far...
Router: CBN CH6541E EuroDOCSIS 3.0
Netgear must have realized something odd with this extender and set up task force team to sort out disconnecting issues. Got in contact with two Netgear engineers and they seem to work on this. - WallyZ21AspirantMy 2 cents worth.
If you set up a continuous ping to the extender then when you start to have problems will will notice "Request timed out" messages and ridiculous ping times:
C:\Documents and Settings\walter>ping -t 10.1.1.3
Pinging 10.1.1.3 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=1125ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=70ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=64ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=75ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=105ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
.
.
.
Request timed out.
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=145ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=2774ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=154ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=64
Ping statistics for 10.1.1.3:
Packets: Sent = 1007, Received = 879, Lost = 128 (12% lost
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 3ms, Maximum = 4054ms, Average = 165ms
Control-C
^C
And here is what is should run like:
C:\Documents and Settings\walter>ping -t 10.1.1.3
Pinging 10.1.1.3 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=64
.
.
.
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=64
Ping statistics for 10.1.1.3:
Packets: Sent = 997, Received = 997, Lost = 0 (0% lost
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 3ms, Maximum = 47ms, Average = 9ms
Control-C
^C
And the observation of others that smart phones are interfering the extender seems accurate. Every five minutes my smart phone attempts to find access points and then the extender starts dropping ping packets. If I turn off my phone it appears to resolve the issue.
However this behavior is only exhibited on netgear products. My smart phone doesn't seem to affect any other manufactures products I have tested. To be fair the only other I have tested is Belkin
It appears netgear wireless products are overtly susceptible to interference. - WallyZ21AspirantExtra to my last post. I think it's not correct to refer to a valid wireless client as interference simply because it is a smart phone.
Any device with a certified wireless network adapter is a valid device including smart phones.
I use the wireless access features of my smart phone which work well when I connect via my router but cause everything to fail when connecting via the extender.
Also I do not understand the rational of people who are suggesting changing the channel number of the extender to avoid interference.
My understanding is the main router dictates the channel and the extender must use that same channel.
Please correct me if the router and extender can be configured to work on different channels to each other.
So if the router is having zero problems with any specific channel why would the extender? If the router is not having interference problems with channel X why should the extender?
The only scenario would be if the router and extender were distant enough that the source of the interference was local to the extender only.
This is a very rare situation and can be eliminated by placing the router and the extender in close proximity to each other.
If both devices are in close proximity and must be using the same channel and one device functions correctly but the other not then I would rule out interference. Simple process of elimination!
And this I have done!
The WN2000RPT extender has some issues people. I can only hope it's not hardware and can be fixed with a firmware update! zambotti wrote: My 2 cents worth.
If you set up a continuous ping to the extender then when you start to have problems will will notice "Request timed out" messages and ridiculous ping times:
C:\Documents and Settings\walter>ping -t 10.1.1.3
Pinging 10.1.1.3 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=1125ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=70ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=64ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=75ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=105ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
.
.
.
Request timed out.
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=145ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=2774ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=154ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=64
Ping statistics for 10.1.1.3:
Packets: Sent = 1007, Received = 879, Lost = 128 (12% lost
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 3ms, Maximum = 4054ms, Average = 165ms
Control-C
^C
And here is what is should run like:
C:\Documents and Settings\walter>ping -t 10.1.1.3
Pinging 10.1.1.3 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=64
.
.
.
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=64
Reply from 10.1.1.3: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=64
Ping statistics for 10.1.1.3:
Packets: Sent = 997, Received = 997, Lost = 0 (0% lost
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 3ms, Maximum = 47ms, Average = 9ms
Control-C
^C
And the observation of others that smart phones are interfering the extender seems accurate. Every five minutes my smart phone attempts to find access points and then the extender starts dropping ping packets. If I turn off my phone it appears to resolve the issue.
However this behavior is only exhibited on netgear products. My smart phone doesn't seem to affect any other manufactures products I have tested. To be fair the only other I have tested is Belkin
It appears netgear wireless products are overtly susceptible to interference.
mine MOTO_Android (V2.2_update) and iPAD2 works with WN2000RPT...what is the model name of ur SMart Phone???- WallyZ21Aspirant
mine MOTO_Android (V2.2_update) and iPAD2 works with WN2000RPT...what is the model name of ur SMart Phone???
I'm using a Nokia N97mini.
The device and extender DO work together for a certain amount of time but when the extender starts disconnecting I have found it can be easily remedied by either rebooting the extender or turning off my smart phone.
This doesn't necessarily mean the phone is the (trigger for the) problem, however I do find this behavior strange. - RafalAspirantI have no SmartPhone and constant internet drops. How would you explain that?
- MarkusM13AspirantI am also experiencing the same problems as many others...
Here is an email I have sent to Netgear support this morning - thought I would paste on here as well just in case anyone has any other solutions
"PROBLEM: Internet connection on the WN2000rpt drops out at least once a day.
I am experiencing what many other users seem to be experiencing with this device (see http://forum1.netgear.com/showthread.php?t=57989&page=6).
When the unit has been rebooted (ie turned off and on again) it functions beautifully for a limited time, however as time goes on and for some unknown reason it bizarely loses its conection to the internet. The connection to the internet with the router remain it is just that the WN2000RPT seems to loose its connection.
This is confirmed as when i connect back to my router (WN3700), that still is an internet conection.
I have done the folowing with the aim of trying to fix the problem:
- Updated to the latests firmware
V1.0.1.20
- Reserved on the router IP addresses to all items on the network (including the WN2000RPT).
- restricted wireless access to only those items on the network that I have given permission for.
- Tried changing the RIP Version (in Lan set-up) from disabled to RIP_2B (or RIP_2M can't remember now but it was a suggestions from someone's post on the forum) - but this severly slowed down my system so I changed it back to disabled
- Changed the security settings to WPA2-PSK [AES] only
Though the above has given a little more stability (ie instead of rebooting the Wn2000RPT twice a day, I now only need to reboot it once a day), it still seems to have the same problem.
Things I have noticed in completing the above:
- when a new wireless item was in the network that hadnt already been added to the list (eg an Iphone) it would apear on the router list with the MAC address of the WN2000RPT?? - not certain if this was normal but it struck me as a little weird.
- A usual trigger for when the WN2000RPT will lose it connection seems to be when another wireless item wants to access the network (usually either the Windows7 64bit laptop, the Apple 3Gs iPhone and occassionally a Win7 32bit laptop).
Items that connected wirelessly to the network are:
1. Windows 7 32bit Sony Vaio Laptop
2. Windows 7 64bit Toshiba laptop
3. iPhone 3Gs
4. Apple TV2
Please help and provide a solution ASAP as this is very frustrating." - ferpleAspirantI have the same problem with this device as other people. At least once a day, the connection to my cable router drops and I get the red light. Only a reset to the WN2000RPT will fix the problem - the connection comes back green straight away.
NETGEAR: given the number of views (on just this forum) of posts on the problems with the WN2000RPT, surely it's time you gave a serious metered response to our issue? I'm not talking about the odd post from someone in Netgear support, I'm talking about a BIG STICKY post that tells everyone "We're sorry, and we're looking at this issue".
Many, many people must be experiencing these problems - the people who have bothered to sign up to your forums or even know about your forums are likely to be a small percentage of the actual customer base having problems.
I appreciate that the problems might be hard to pin down and fix, but at least make it clear that the problem is recognised by Netgear and is being worked on.
I've paid the best part of $100 for a device that I can't rely on that I'm on the verge of returning. Surely this isn't customer service? The lack of response from Netgear on it's own customer support forums have completely put me off buying Netgear in the future. - PhilBofaAspirantHi I am new to this forum and have been following it for the same solution to the WN2000RPT dilemma that we all have been experiencing. Please keep in mind that I am not extremely technical but I do get by. I am trouble free for the past 48 hours and was wondering if I may have stumbled onto a solution. This is what I have and what is on my network Comcast Cable Modem with the Triple Play package Netgear router WNR1000v2-VC supplied by Comcast Obviously the WN2000RPT extender On my network at any given time are; 1 iPhone 3Gs running lasted iOS 1 iPhone 3Gs running 4.1 iOS 1 iPad 1st Gen running lastest iOS 1 Acer laptop running Vista Home SP1 1 PS3 1 Apple TV 1st Gen last iOS 1 Old HP Desktop running XP SP3 (hardwired to router) I was experiencing the same problem with connectivity to the internet through the extender dropping once a day and yet at the same time still able to connect to the extender. Just a side note: One thing I found odd. (maybe it comes from my inexperience) On the router setup "Access List" I noticed that certain devices would show up and then not when I know the devices were connected via the extender. And in most cases a device would show up with the extender's MAC address. I could never replicate the same list. It frustrated me. My fix SO FAR... I decided to recycle my modem, router and extender at the same time reboot my desktop. I started by disconnecting in this order modem (do not forget to remove the backup battery if applicable) router extender then shut down desktop then after 15 mins I reconnected and started (waiting for each to fully boot) my modem then router then extender then booted the desktop I am wondering if certain MAC or IP addresses need to be flushed (excuse the lack of correct terminology) and everything needs a clean start. I am still anticipating my problem to come back. But, so far so good.