Version 9.18 will not accept HD Homerun

[mrweston]

My old HD Homerun from Silicon dust died. I purchased the latest and unistalled all of the old HD homerun drivers and software. I loaded the new drivers and the HD homerun works by itself and appears in the Sage.properties but is not available as a new source. Silicondust was nice and looked at the log files and told me that Sage does not see the new tuners.

Has anybody else found a solution?

[fidget]

I had a problem where my HDHomeRun today nerds went missing. It turned out that the tuners were expecting a different subnet mask than I was using. When I changed the mask to 255.255.0.0, they were seen again by SageTV.

[Tiki]

Originally Posted by mrweston

My old HD Homerun from Silicon dust died. I purchased the latest and unistalled all of the old HD homerun drivers and software. I loaded the new drivers and the HD homerun works by itself and appears in the Sage.properties but is not available as a new source. Silicondust was nice and looked at the log files and told me that Sage does not see the new tuners.

Has anybody else found a solution?

There are several different types of HDHR. The procedure for setting them up is different for each. You need to tell us which type you are using:
Cable Card tuner
Digital Cable (QAM)
OTA antenna (ATSC)
DVB (used in some countries outside the US)

[wayner]

Originally Posted by fidget

I had a problem where my HDHomeRun today nerds went missing. It turned out that the tuners were expecting a different subnet mask than I was using. When I changed the mask to 255.255.0.0, they were seen again by SageTV.

nerds? Autocorrect issue?

[bigbill]

I bought a new one for the MH last summer, it works fine after running the setup and updating the firmware. I read something about newer HDHR having MP4 encoding firmware and that SageTV doesn't support that. Not sure if the new one I purchased has that feature or not. -Bill

[mlcarson]

This netmask would be wrong for most networks. I can't imagine a home network that would require more than a /24 (255.255.255.0). If you aren't using the same first three octets of an IP address for all of your network devices, you should be asking yourself why not? If you are then all of your netmasks should be changed to 255.255.255.0 and verify that your router is configured for the same.

Changing your netmask to 255.255.0.0 might have allowed your HDHomeRun to work but points to larger networking issues.

Originally Posted by fidget

I had a problem where my HDHomeRun today nerds went missing. It turned out that the tuners were expecting a different subnet mask than I was using. When I changed the mask to 255.255.0.0, they were seen again by SageTV.

[fidget]

Originally Posted by mlcarson

This netmask would be wrong for most networks. I can't imagine a home network that would require more than a /24 (255.255.255.0). If you aren't using the same first three octets of an IP address for all of your network devices, you should be asking yourself why not? If you are then all of your netmasks should be changed to 255.255.255.0 and verify that your router is configured for the same.

Changing your netmask to 255.255.0.0 might have allowed your HDHomeRun to work but points to larger networking issues.

I used Wireshark and saw what the HDHR application was sending (the app worked for the PC and iPad on the res that Sage couldn’t see). That is how I saw the disconnect. Their app was broadcasting (255.255.255.255) and the response was coming over with an odd subnet (192.168.255.255 instead of the 192.168.0.255 that my network was setup to use). The HDHRs got their IP addresses from the same DHCP server as everything else on my network, but they were the only boxes that Sage couldn’t talk to.

Because I have a Mac on the network, the Sage server doesn’t DHCP.

[mlcarson]

You're shorthand is confusing me -- the "res" that Sage couldn't see?
255.255.255.255 is an all nets broadcast but not many apps use this; typically network broadcasts are done at layer-2 ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff. or via layer-3 multicast with the exception of DHCP. The 192.168.255.255 is not normal as you stated. My assumption is that if your HDHR's are responding on 192.168.255.255 that they have a subnet mask of 255.255.0.0. They could be receiving a DHCP address but if you have anything in the fields for a static IP address like the subnet mask then that could be overriding your DHCP information.

The Mac should be playing by the same network rules that all of your other devices are. It can use DHCP. OSX is just running on a FreeBSD Unix variant.

Bottomline is that using a 255.255.0.0 mask is a kludge and you'll eventually want to find out the underlying issue. If you switch everything over to a /16 network configuration then I guess you won't have any problems but it'd bother me. I haven't had any weird network issues with the HDHR devices. My HDHR3-CC is on firmware 20170930

Originally Posted by fidget

I used Wireshark and saw what the HDHR application was sending (the app worked for the PC and iPad on the res that Sage couldn’t see). That is how I saw the disconnect. Their app was broadcasting (255.255.255.255) and the response was coming over with an odd subnet (192.168.255.255 instead of the 192.168.0.255 that my network was setup to use). The HDHRs got their IP addresses from the same DHCP server as everything else on my network, but they were the only boxes that Sage couldn’t talk to.

Because I have a Mac on the network, the Sage server doesn’t DHCP.

[fidget]

Originally Posted by mlcarson

You're shorthand is confusing me -- the "res" that Sage couldn't see?
255.255.255.255 is an all nets broadcast but not many apps use this; typically network broadcasts are done at layer-2 ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff. or via layer-3 multicast with the exception of DHCP. The 192.168.255.255 is not normal as you stated. My assumption is that if your HDHR's are responding on 192.168.255.255 that they have a subnet mask of 255.255.0.0. They could be receiving a DHCP address but if you have anything in the fields for a static IP address like the subnet mask then that could be overriding your DHCP information.

The Mac should be playing by the same network rules that all of your other devices are. It can use DHCP. OSX is just running on a FreeBSD Unix variant.

Bottomline is that using a 255.255.0.0 mask is a kludge and you'll eventually want to find out the underlying issue. If you switch everything over to a /16 network configuration then I guess you won't have any problems but it'd bother me. I haven't had any weird network issues with the HDHR devices. My HDHR3-CC is on firmware 20170930

*sigh* My DHCP server is telling the clients to use a subnet mask of 255.255.0.0 and there is nothing that I can do to change that (cable modems don’t provide the configurability that they should). The HDHR seems to be unusually sensitive to mismatched subnet masks. This is probably due to the face that it isn’t responding in the same manner as it is “pinged”. I would expect that if it was talked to over 192.168.0.255, or 255.255.255.255, then it would respond with the the same broadcast address. It does not, and this confuses the HDHR software that Sage uses to talk to the tuners.

I know that macOS is a variant of BSD UNIX. Having your subnet mask set to 255.255.0.0, while not “optional”, is not a kludge. It’s a home network and my DHCP server probably can’t handle more than about 100 clients anyway.

The ‘res’ is the stupid autocorrect that came along in iOS 11. Talk about taking steps backwards. That should have been ‘tuners’. I have no idea how it became ‘res’. Using AI for autocorrect wasn’t a good idea.

The reason for having the hard coded network info on the PC is because macOS can’t resolve the name of the Sage server so I must use its IP address to connect.

[mlcarson]

Sounds like you have a complete grasp of the problem. I think the HDHR's are responding correctly. They should look at their own network configuration rather than the source. Doing anything to the contrary would create a situation that could be exploited.

Using a 255.255.0.0 netmask in itself is no kludge since it's a completely valid network configuration. Having to use a 255.255.0.0 netmask because your DHCP server can't manage to send the proper subnet mask is a kludge.

My Comcast router did not behave that way but sucked in other ways so I just recently got rid of it. I already had an Edgerouter Lite so purchased a Netgear CM500V (I have their voice service so needed an EMTA). I'd really recommend most people to dump the cable company supplied gear and purchase separate modem, router, and wireless AP's (such as Ubiquiti's). You'll quickly pay for any modem purchase by not having to do rental equipment. The equipment that Comcast wants you to rent here is a combined modem/wifi/moca router that's also an EMTA. The problem with having everything in one basket controlled by an outside entity is that their maintenance disrupts your internal network and not just the external side.

The problem with all-in-one integrated devices in general is that they cut too many corners to get the price down. Support also tends to end as soon as the next model comes out.