Unable to obtain a server assigned IP address

dEvery time i connect my device to ActiveSync i get the message "Unable to
obtain a server assigned IP adress. Try again later or enter an IP adress in
the Network settings." How can i solve this problem please.

 

Hi,
Do you have the DHCP Client service running on the PC?


--
Chris De Herrera
http://www.pocketpcfaq.com
http://www.tabletpctalk.com
http://www.pocketpctalk.com
http://www.mobilitytalk.com

ActiveSync 4.x Troubleshooting Guide -
http://www.pocketpcfaq.com/faqs/activesync/tshoot-as4x.htm

 

This is on the device that you see the message or on the PC? If the device,
open the Control Panel | Connections | Network Cards applet and tap on the
Remote-NDIS Host item. If Use server assigned IP address is selected,
change to selecting Use specific IP address and set the address fields to:

169.254.2.1
255.255.255.0
blank

Paul T.

 

In the "Services" there is running a "DHPC" client

 

I need the Internet ruglair. This IP 169.254.2.1 , can i use it to go on the
Internet on a other router?

 

You lost me. The IP is just the IP of your local device. It neither
enables nor prevents Internet access. The ActiveSync program running on the
connected PC is responsible for forwarding the network traffic to Web
servers, etc. That is, the router configuration of the *PC* determines how
the Internet is accessed.

Paul T.

 

I think you may have missed the point. Some ppc's have multiple nics, e.g.
the usb for activesync, wifi, bluetooth etc.

If one freezes the IP of the subnet, as you describe, then what happens when
trying to access the (inter)net through a wifi router which is running a DHCP
server? Is the ppc capable of different ip's for each of its interfaces? If
that is so, then how come the NDIS seems to be generically associated with
connections?

Thanks in advance for your response.

dan

 

If the WiFi router is still on the same subnet, it shouldn't care.
Obviously, if you have a static IP set for your wireless device and then you
change the subnet part of the router's IP address, then it's not going to
work, but it doesn't care if its users got their IP addresses from it via
DHCP or whether they are statically allocated.

Yes, each adapter must have its own IP address and there is no need for them
to have *any* relationship to each other. The WiFi adapter might be
172.16.0.127, while the GPRS adapter might have 221.147.2.77 (or whatever;
they're just random numbers, as far as you know). The only effect that one
has on the other is that packets might be routed via one adapter or the
other because of which network they are configured to be connected to or
which interface is lower-cost (usually this equates to "faster").

In any case, though, when communicating via ActiveSync to the Internet,
routing is being done by the desktop PC on which ActiveSync is running.
It's routing, really it's proxying, packets from the Pocket PC to whatever
server it's trying to talk to.

Paul T.

 

Thanks *very* much for the swift response. Well the wifi router won't be on
the same subnet since most of the nat routers (including mine, a dlink)
use192.168.xxx or 10.xxx for the hosts since these are "off net". Also, one
has no control of the subnet when going to another location and using the
routers there.

For specificity, I recently got an MDA aka HTC Wizard.

My confusion is that I don't know what interface I am assigning the static
IP to. In the connections panel three adapters are listed: Remote-NDIS
HOst, NE2000 Compatible Driver, and SDIO WLAN Wireless Adapter. To fess up,
I don't know what Remote-NDIS Host means. However when looking in the
Network adaptors menu under "wlan", this seems to be the interface that it is
using, not the SDIO thingie.

If ActiveSync routing is being sone via some kind of proxy (the AKU thing,
whatever that is?), then why does the wlan interface matter?

I guess I am not clear on what is being set to 169.xxxx or why setting it
to this value makes the OS find a connection.

I don't use or subscribe to GPRS so I haven't experimented with that
interface.

I don't know whether others have the same points of confusion, I suspect
they may either know more, or less, or just want a recipe.

Hope this helps focus the confusion (and hopefully remove some). It seems
that random notes on this error message, and the 169.xxx fix are posted all
over the net, but without explanation. Your posting was the only one I
spotted that seemed to know what they were talking about (fundamentals
wise)!!!

Also, what does the DHCP flag in the registry do? One poster suggested that
the ppc was trying to act as a DHCP server when this flag was on (seems
unlikely, right?). I was reluctant to turn it off because of the above
concern (e.g. the ppc needs to acquire a DHCP address from a router when used
"on the road")--- right? or is it (seems absurd) a flag to allow the ppc to
be a DHCP server?

Many thanks again for you time and help.

Best regards,
dan

 

OK, I have the same basic hardware, an iMate K-Jam.

Remote NDIS Host - the thing that ActiveSync uses when communicating with
the device.

NE2000-Compatible Driver - the NE2000 is a wired Ethernet chip. Not sure
why this is here, but may be for OEM debugging. You'd never use it for
anything yourself.

SDIO WLAN Wireless Adapter - the WiFi stuff. This is what you'd set, if you
want the WiFi adapter to be on some particular address.

Note that, while connected to ActiveSync, the operating system in WM5 shuts
down WiFi adapters, so, while connected via ActiveSync, yes, your SDIO WiFi
adapter is disabled!

The DHCP assignment flag indicates whether the adapter should go out looking
for a server to assign it an IP address. In the case of Remote NDIS Host,
no, that should be assigned the indicated static address. In the case of
WLAN, whether it needs to be DHCP or static depends on the situation. DHCP
is usually safe, as most access points can act as DHCP servers.

Frankly, it's been so long since this thread started, I don't remember what
the original question was. Remote NDIS Host *must* be statically-assigned.
SDIO WLAN Wireless Adapter can be either, depending on what you need to do.
WiFi *cannot* be active while ActiveSync USB is connected.

Paul T.

 

Ok, I see that I can still get an address from the DHCP server on
192.168.100.254 when I have the static 169.xxx address set, so I guess this
necessarily means that the 169.xxx is for a different NIC, although it was
anything but apparent.

What about the DHCP registry flag per question below?

Also any clarification about the nics in the device and access to set static
or dynamic IP's for the various interfaces, and what they are, would be much
appreciated.

Sorry for talking past you, just to save you answering something I could
find out for myself.

best,
dan

 

Perfect!! Understandable and understood )

This thread was old, but there are many current threads elsewhere still
asking the same or equivalent questions. Microworst should have published
some understandable info or docs, but hey, what's new?

best regards,
dan

 

I'm sure that they don't expect this to stand still. Documenting something
is a sure way to get some programmer to count on it and not write his code
to be flexible enough to adapt to the next-version design. I think that's
what they're trying to avoid. You can use WinSock or RAPI to write code
that uses the ActiveSync connection, but don't count on how data is
transmitted, over what medium, etc.

Paul T.

 

Since you have the same hardware, one last question, if you know.

The wifi radio is a bit insensitive. There is an external antenna jack, but
the drift on the net and the service manual (obtained from the net) seem to
show that this jack is only for the phone radio, not wifi.

Have you bumped into any way, or any mods, for improving wifi sensitivity.
It is not apparent what the wifi radio chip is connected to for an antenna- I
would have guessed that the phone and wifi would share an antenna with
loading coils or the like, but no clues.

For home use the kludge solution is to improve local signal strength, but
that doesn't work for walking about in Mountain View or SF (free wifi).

This NOT the right thread I know, but as a thread posting adverse hermit, I
don't know how to both post and insure you see this. tnx, dan

 

I know little about the hardware design, but I'd be surprised if a WiFi
antenna connection was there. I'm sure that's the phone radio. There's
nothing that you can do. It's either there or not; the antenna is either
good enough or not. It's not a software problem.

No, I'd be pretty surprised, again, if WiFi and the phone shared an antenna.
Antenna design is a black art, but the size of the antenna is related to the
frequencies which are to be received and sent. The phone and the WiFi
frequencies don't really overlap. WiFi is in the 2.4GHz range and the K-Jam
has the following GSM frequencies: 850MHz, 900MHz, 1800MHz, 1900MHz.

Paul T.

 

Well, not that much of a black art really. I'm an engineer as well as a radio
ham. If the antenna is physically small for the wavelength or the field is
absorbed or blocked by its surroundings, propagation will be poor. Since the
gsm frequencies are lower, ergo a quarter wave longer, the gsm antenna should
be tunable (matchable) to 2450 without much pain-- but the loading might
complicate design- I don't know how this is done (e.g. switching on the radio
ic, switching loading coils/capacitance, or whatever).

The phone radio seems to be pretty ok, as compared with the wifi. Even a
laptop pcmcia wifi card seems *much* more sensitive. So I was thinking maybe
there is almost no antenna on the wifi, or maybe just a piece of something
which was orphaned in the design.

I know it is not my unit because I swapped pda's with Tmobile and my wife
has one which is about the same. The SDA's (mobile phone form factor and
software) aren't noticibly better.

No, I also don't see how software could help unless something can be
switched in under program control. The only out I could see is maybe a
splicing a piece of wire onto something hack-- ergo the external jack.

Cheers. d

 

I'm sure that the latter, the surroundings, are the problem in this case.
The WiFi is connected via SDIO to the processor and I suspect that it's a
module purchased for the purpose. There's probably some sort of an internal
antenna, but obviously, the casing of the device is all around it and is
infused with metal.

Yes, the WiFi range doesn't match my laptop's built-in whip antenna even
close. I suppose that the idea of having an external antenna didn't appeal
to the designers.

Paul T.

 

I had the same issue. The solution you provided below completely fixed the
problem! Thanks!

 

Thanks Paul...probem solved. Many thanks

 

Worked for me. Thanks
Chris