Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
27 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Ray Davison
I am trying to set up a router and I expect to get failed to connect
messages.  When the browser opens I get a failed to connect to the home
page; SM, OK so far.  I then try to connect to the router and the failed
to connect box does not change, is still says failed to connect to SM.
I have no indication that it even tried to connect to the router.

This is OS/2 only, Win XP OK.  Both are SM 2.7.2.

Has this been previously noted?

Ray
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Peter-55
Hi Ray,

On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 20:47:37 UTC, Ray Davison <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> I am trying to set up a router and I expect to get failed to connect
> messages.  When the browser opens I get a failed to connect to the home
> page; SM, OK so far.  I then try to connect to the router and the failed
> to connect box does not change, is still says failed to connect to SM.
> I have no indication that it even tried to connect to the router.
>
> This is OS/2 only, Win XP OK.  Both are SM 2.7.2.

What browser are you using?

> Has this been previously noted?

Not that I have heard, Does the web server even exist, If so, is it
set up correctly (IE no ACL denying access)?

> Ray

Cheers..............pk.

--
Peter from Auckland.

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Steve Wendt
On 3/12/2012 3:26 PM, Peter wrote:

>> This is OS/2 only, Win XP OK.  Both are SM 2.7.2.
>
> What browser are you using?

SM = SeaMonkey.
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

William L. Hartzell-2
In reply to this post by Ray Davison
Sir:

Ray Davison wrote:

> I am trying to set up a router and I expect to get failed to connect
> messages. When the browser opens I get a failed to connect to the home
> page; SM, OK so far. I then try to connect to the router and the failed
> to connect box does not change, is still says failed to connect to SM. I
> have no indication that it even tried to connect to the router.
>
> This is OS/2 only, Win XP OK. Both are SM 2.7.2.
>
> Has this been previously noted?
>
> Ray
Assuming that you do have a LAN connection to the router, you should be
able to enter the dot number of the router on the address bar and press
enter to connect to it.  My router is address as 192.168.1.1 and it asks
for user name and password.

To check for LAN connection, use ping to your router's IP.

Alas, I'm still using SM 2.5, so I don't know.
--
Bill
Thanks a Million!
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Ray Davison
In reply to this post by Ray Davison
Ray Davison wrote:
> I am trying to set up a router and I expect to get failed to connect
> messages.

The router story is here.
[hidden email]
I will share here if anyone is interested.  Briefly, it is a wireless
router acting as a remote wireless bridge.  It used to work and now it
does not.

The subject here is SeaMonkey(SM), and why the OS/2 version, when it
fails to connect, gives me no indication that it even tried.

Ray

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Dave Yeo-3
Ray Davison wrote:
> Ray Davison wrote:
>> I am trying to set up a router and I expect to get failed to connect
>> messages.
>
> The router story is here.
> [hidden email]

Should be
http://mail.2rosenthals.com:8100/Lists/os2-wireless_users/Message/7169.html?Language=

> I will share here if anyone is interested. Briefly, it is a wireless
> router acting as a remote wireless bridge. It used to work and now it
> does not.
>
> The subject here is SeaMonkey(SM), and why the OS/2 version, when it
> fails to connect, gives me no indication that it even tried.
>

I'm not sure if I'm understanding you. You're entering an IP address
into the URL bar such as 192.168.0.1 and nothing happens as the router
is non-functional?
Here if I do that, I see the connecting to thing at the bottom of the
browser, in the frame as usual and eventually I get the Network Timeout
page as expected. It does take a while to time out.
Dave

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Ray Davison
Dave Yeo wrote:
>
> I'm not sure if I'm understanding you. You're entering an IP address
> into the URL bar such as 192.168.0.1 and nothing happens as the router
> is non-functional?
> Here if I do that, I see the connecting to thing at the bottom of the
> browser, in the frame as usual and eventually I get the Network Timeout
> page as expected. It does take a while to time out.

When the browser opens it tries to go to the SM  home page; the default.
  And after time out a box opens that says Address not found; Seamonkey.
  That is to be expected because that machine is functioning as a remote
and the remote router is not functioning properly.  If I then enter the
router address and click enter, the "Stop" light blinks, and that is
all.  The time out box still says Address not found Seamonkey.  The same
action under WinXP yields a time out box that says Address not found;
router address.

Ray

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Felix Miata-2
On 2012/03/14 19:47 (GMT-0400) Ray Davison composed:

> When the browser opens it tries to go to the SM  home page; the default.
>   And after time out a box opens that says Address not found; Seamonkey.
>   That is to be expected because that machine is functioning as a remote
> and the remote router is not functioning properly.  If I then enter the
> router address and click enter, the "Stop" light blinks, and that is
> all.  The time out box still says Address not found Seamonkey.  The same
> action under WinXP yields a time out box that says Address not found;
> router address.

Does it behave the same if you try opening the second URL in a separate tab?
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Ray Davison
Felix Miata wrote:
>
> Does it behave the same if you try opening the second URL in a separate tab?

It is just not accepting numerical address.  On my WEB machine which is
connected to the primary router, if I enter 192.168.1.1 it successfully
accesses the router.  If I reenter the same number - which is still in
the address box from the first attempt - it gets changed to
http://192.168.1.1/, and that also works.  If I enter either form in the
remote system, Stop blinks and the tab still says Untitled.  The address
seems to be ignored.

However, when I had security off, and was able to access the router and
the WEB, those numerical addresses did work.  It seems to know they
won't work and just doesn't bother to try.  But WinXP does.

I have kept a copy of SM 1119 on that machine, and it functions the same
way.

Ray
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Steve Wendt
On 3/14/2012 6:34 PM, Ray Davison wrote:

> However, when I had security off, and was able to access the router and
> the WEB, those numerical addresses did work. It seems to know they won't
> work and just doesn't bother to try. But WinXP does.

Do you have loopback enabled?  In other words, is localhost pointing to
127.0.0.1 in your %etc%\hosts file?
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Ray Davison
Steve Wendt wrote:
>
> Do you have loopback enabled? In other words, is localhost pointing to
> 127.0.0.1 in your %etc%\hosts file?

Yes, and that is the way it installed.

Ray


_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Dave Yeo-3
In reply to this post by Ray Davison
Ray Davison wrote:

> Felix Miata wrote:
>>
>> Does it behave the same if you try opening the second URL in a
>> separate tab?
>
> It is just not accepting numerical address. On my WEB machine which is
> connected to the primary router, if I enter 192.168.1.1 it successfully
> accesses the router. If I reenter the same number - which is still in
> the address box from the first attempt - it gets changed to
> http://192.168.1.1/, and that also works. If I enter either form in the
> remote system, Stop blinks and the tab still says Untitled. The address
> seems to be ignored.
>
> However, when I had security off, and was able to access the router and
> the WEB, those numerical addresses did work. It seems to know they won't
> work and just doesn't bother to try. But WinXP does.
>
> I have kept a copy of SM 1119 on that machine, and it functions the same
> way.
>
> Ray

I find that, excepting restoring the old session, SeaMonkey doesn't do
anything here until it connects to the internet. If you kill SeaMonkey
you'll probably find it won't load the home page either on restart. Why
it acts this way I don't know.
Dave
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Felix Miata-2
In reply to this post by Ray Davison
On 2012/03/14 18:34 (GMT-0700) Ray Davison composed:

> It is just not accepting numerical address.  On my WEB machine which is
> connected to the primary router, if I enter 192.168.1.1 it successfully
> accesses the router.  If I reenter the same number - which is still in
> the address box from the first attempt - it gets changed to
> http://192.168.1.1/, and that also works.  If I enter either form in the
> remote system, Stop blinks and the tab still says Untitled.  The address
> seems to be ignored.

I rarely ever type anything it the urlbar on SM, unlike FF, due to the
difference in the way each handles history. On SM instead I use file open web
location unless I want a change in the content of the history dropdown.

But, ignored input is not unfamiliar to me. It often happens that I can put
focus in the searchbar, where it did work since startup, but any more I type or
edit there is simply ignored when I hit enter or the search icon. It will work
if I switch to a new tab & try again. Since the focus trouble started post-2.6,
getting focus back is unreliable, and figuring out where focus actually is is
often impossible. I'm often tempted to try to switch back to 2.6.x.
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

James Moe-3
In reply to this post by Ray Davison
On 03/14/2012 04:47 PM, Ray Davison wrote:

>
> When the browser opens it tries to go to the SM  home page; the default.
>  And after time out a box opens that says Address not found; Seamonkey.
>  That is to be expected because that machine is functioning as a remote
> and the remote router is not functioning properly.  If I then enter the
> router address and click enter, the "Stop" light blinks, and that is
> all.  The time out box still says Address not found Seamonkey.  The same
> action under WinXP yields a time out box that says Address not found;
> router address.
>
  What does "remote" mean here? How "remote" is the remote computer?
  How are you expecting it to connect to the router? A direct wireless
connection? Or by a cabled connection?
  Is it on the same subnet as the router? (Say, 192.168.1.x?)
  Does the remote computer have a gateway route defined to get to the
router?

--
James Moe
jmm-list at sohnen-moe dot com
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Ray Davison
In reply to this post by Dave Yeo-3
Dave Yeo wrote:
>
> I find that, excepting restoring the old session, SeaMonkey doesn't do
> anything here until it connects to the internet. If you kill SeaMonkey
> you'll probably find it won't load the home page either on restart. Why
> it acts this way I don't know.

The SM default home page is a WEB site.  If SM cannot get to the WEB, it
cannot load the home page.  When the remote router is not functioning,
SM cannot get to the WEB, so no home page.  All that is to be expected.

But OS/2 SM at least tries to get to the SM WEB site, and says so.  Same
with any other "normal" URL.  But, an address such as 192.168.1.1 or
http://192.168.1.1/, if it cannot connect, it gives me no indication it
even tried.  Opening a new tab does not change anything.

Ray


_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Ray Davison
In reply to this post by Ray Davison
Ray Davison wrote:
>
> It is just not accepting numerical address. On my WEB machine which
> is connected to the primary router, if I enter 192.168.1.1 it
> successfully accesses the router. If I reenter the same number -
> which is still in the address box from the first attempt - it gets
> changed to http://192.168.1.1/, and that also works.

To clarify, the above WEB machine at the time was running WinXP.  Win SM
works as I would expect, OS/2 SM does not, and that is my whole point.

> If I enter either form in the remote system, Stop blinks and the tab
> still says Untitled. The address seems to be ignored.

Ray
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Felix Miata-2
In reply to this post by Ray Davison
On 2012/03/15 11:08 (GMT-0700) Ray Davison composed:

> OS/2 SM at least tries to get to the SM WEB site, and says so.  Same
> with any other "normal" URL.  But, an address such as 192.168.1.1 or
> http://192.168.1.1/, if it cannot connect, it gives me no indication it
> even tried.  Opening a new tab does not change anything.

Since 2.7.2 behaves as expected here and elsewhere, it seems as though you
likely have a profile issue. What happens when you try a virgin profile?

ISTR you share a profile between OS/2 & Windows. If this is correct, I have to
suspect something Windows puts in the profile that OS/2 chokes on.
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Ray Davison
In reply to this post by James Moe-3
James Moe wrote:

> What does "remote" mean here? How "remote" is the remote computer?

About two feet.

> How are you expecting it to connect to the router? A direct wireless
> connection? Or by a cabled connection?

Cable.

> Is it on the same subnet as the router? (Say, 192.168.1.x?) Does the
> remote computer have a gateway route defined to get to the router?
>
The remote system consists of one computer and one router.  When things
work, enter 192.168.1.1 or http://192.168.1.1/, and a box opens asking
for a user name and password.  It does not require me to know anything
about subnets or gateways; good thing too because I mostly don't know
anything about them.

Ray
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Bob-351
In reply to this post by Felix Miata-2
In one case it will try to use a DNS, in the other it will go direct.
Try putting an entry for the home page in the HOSTS file and see what
happens.

Felix Miata wrote:

> On 2012/03/15 11:08 (GMT-0700) Ray Davison composed:
>
>> OS/2 SM at least tries to get to the SM WEB site, and says so.  Same
>> with any other "normal" URL.  But, an address such as 192.168.1.1 or
>> http://192.168.1.1/, if it cannot connect, it gives me no indication it
>> even tried.  Opening a new tab does not change anything.
>
> Since 2.7.2 behaves as expected here and elsewhere, it seems as though you
> likely have a profile issue. What happens when you try a virgin profile?
>
> ISTR you share a profile between OS/2 & Windows. If this is correct, I have to
> suspect something Windows puts in the profile that OS/2 chokes on.
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Browser does not show new "failed to connect"

Felix Miata-2
On 2012/03/16 09:28 (GMT+1300) Bob composed:

> Felix Miata wrote:

>> On 2012/03/15 11:08 (GMT-0700) Ray Davison composed:

>>> OS/2 SM at least tries to get to the SM WEB site, and says so.  Same
>>> with any other "normal" URL.  But, an address such as 192.168.1.1 or
>>> http://192.168.1.1/, if it cannot connect, it gives me no indication it
>>> even tried.  Opening a new tab does not change anything.

>> Since 2.7.2 behaves as expected here and elsewhere, it seems as though you
>> likely have a profile issue. What happens when you try a virgin profile?

>> ISTR you share a profile between OS/2 & Windows. If this is correct, I have to
>> suspect something Windows puts in the profile that OS/2 chokes on.

> In one case it will try to use a DNS, in the other it will go direct.
> Try putting an entry for the home page in the HOSTS file and see what
> happens.

I've never run across a router with a "home page" URL, only an IP. What's
failing in SM for Ray is trying to access an unavailable IP, which SM is not
reporting as with other unreachable pages.
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
12