my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Reset MI-WAVE 3D system without web-server

Author Topic: Reset MI-WAVE 3D system without web-server Nikita Oksenchuk Film Handler Posts: 2 From: Minsk, Belarus Registered: Feb 2019 posted 10-12-2019 02:56 PM                    Hello! How can I reset mi-wave 3d system without a web server? Included with this system was no control box.  |  IP: Logged Dave Macaulay Film God Posts: 2321 From: Toronto, Canada Registered: Apr 2001 posted 10-13-2019 04:20 AM                     What do you mean by reset? The MI Wave has a "webserver" built in for configuration and control. Details are in the manual. It's normally set to activate and move in front of the lens when the sync signal frequency indicates a 3D show, but you can also send commands via network to control it. There is a cueslib file available for Doremi servers: others... you're likely on your own.  |  IP: Logged Nikita Oksenchuk Film Handler Posts: 2 From: Minsk, Belarus Registered: Feb 2019 posted 10-13-2019 05:03 AM                    I don't have an ip address and subnet mask to connect to the 3d system. The default information in the manual does not work. I need to reset the 3d system to use the web server.  |  IP: Logged Adrian Avram Film Handler Posts: 45 From: Iasi, Romania Registered: Oct 2013 posted 10-13-2019 05:26 AM                     Hi, Use an IP scanner software and a laptop connected to the ethernet port to find the IP of the MI Wave. I do not know any other way to reset to the default address. There is no hidden reset button inside on the boards to my knowledge.  |  IP: Logged Dave Macaulay Film God Posts: 2321 From: Toronto, Canada Registered: Apr 2001 posted 10-13-2019 09:25 AM                     Good plan. I use Wireshark. Start it up, start it monitoring the port connecting to the MI, then power up the MI. Pretty much every device with a network port sends out a few "who has xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx" messages - and other stuff I don't understand - when it powers up. The source address for these messages is for the connected device. This shows all activity on your PC port so have it connected ONLY to the device you want the address of... the screen will scroll quickly with an astounding amount of extraneous crap if it's connected to your local network.  |  IP: Logged Sean McKinnon Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1712 From: Peabody Massachusetts Registered: Sep 2000 posted 10-13-2019 03:15 PM                        I find advanced ip scanner more helpful for this than wireshark  |  IP: Logged Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 10-14-2019 06:35 AM                     The problem with IP scanners is that they don't help when you don't know what subnet the device is you're trying to get access to. Like Dave pointed out: Connect the device directly to the ethernet port on your computer (you may need a cross-over cable in some cases) and run WireShark on Windows or tcpdump on any Linux/Unix machine and wait until the other device burps out an IP packet, then you know what IP the thing is on. WireShark and tcpdump run in "promiscuous mode", so they also capture all traffic not destined for the machine itself, even if it's in an entirely different subnet or in many cases even if there is no IP address assigned to the interface of the listening machine. I've used this method multiple times to find the particular IP address of a device of which the original config details are lost. Once you found the IP address of the other device, you can give your machine an IP address in the same subnet and connect to it. The only thing that you still need to guess is the subnet mask, but as long as long as yours matches up to and including the 3rd octet and your subnetmask isn't smaller than that of the other device, it should work.  |  IP: Logged Bruce Cloutier Expert Film Handler Posts: 161 From: Gibsonia, PA, USA Registered: Aug 2016 posted 10-14-2019 08:12 AM                        quote: Marcel Birgelen WireShark and tcpdump run in "promiscuous mode", so they also capture all traffic not destined for the machine itself, even if it's in an entirely different subnet or in many cases even if there is no IP address assigned to the interface of the listening machine. This works well for traffic broadcasted by the device with the unknown addressing. It helps to be aware of the difference between a "network switch" and a "hub". We keep a number of "hubs" around for use in situations when you want to watch traffic between two other devices. Or, a device and the gateway. Just about all you can get these days are switches. Those try to be smart and only route packets to addressed devices in an effort to reduce bandwidth and network load. So your PC connected to a switch won't see packets from the unknown device unless they are specifically addressed to the PC or broadcasted. Just FYI and worth noting if you are going to mess with Wireshark and want to really analyze some of the communications. Most devices broadcast something at some point (most likely after power is applied) so you might see that. We do a lot with Wireshark since the JNIOR Series 4 can export a network capture using the NETSTAT command. The capture is a PCAP file that will open right up in Wireshark. The JNIOR is always queuing packets so it is kind of like you can look back in time when something needs attention. By the way, JNIORs use a protocol called Beacon and announce themselves with UDP packets on port 4444. Most of that is with broadcasts and it is how the Support Tool can enumerate JNIORs on the current subnet. If you are in Wireshark you might peek at that for fun assuming you have a JNIOR around.  |  IP: Logged Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 10-14-2019 11:37 AM                     You shouldn't put a switch in between in this case, as a switch sends directed packets only to the ports the switch has seen the MAC address on. A hub will work fine, but hubs are increasingly hard to find. An alternative is a monitoring port on a switch. Most managed switches allow you to configure a monitoring port, that will essentially receive a copy of all traffic on the ports you specified. Almost every device running IPv4 will at some point do some broadcast traffic, to resolve some local IP address to its MAC address via ARP, even if it's just the local gateway.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-15-2019 08:06 AM                     Totally agree on using Advanced IP Scanner! Going into an unfamiliar booth you can get a list of all equipment and IP address in about a minute. Mark  |  IP: Logged Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 10-15-2019 07:52 PM                     Again, it may be a good tool in a network where your machine gets an IP address in the same subnet, but it will not work in this particular case...  |  IP: Logged Bruce Cloutier Expert Film Handler Posts: 161 From: Gibsonia, PA, USA Registered: Aug 2016 posted 10-16-2019 09:18 AM                        We've run into some issues with IP scanners and the JNIOR. Basically most of those attempt to open certain key ports at each possible local IP address. Some of those scanners then attempt default logins and or protocol exchanges in an attempt to identify security risks or additional specific information about the active port. Connections made by the scanner are sometimes left open and not properly closed. Sometimes the assumption of a protocol can forward data that is confusing to the system. Generally none of this is a real issue but we have had some concerns. For instance, the Series 4 JNIOR can make secure connections. A port scanner testing port 443 makes a secure connection. A secure connection is labor intensive from the point of view of the JNIOR's microcontroller. The unnecessary load can cause variations in timing. I supposed that adds some risk in affecting the job that the JNIOR has to do. Our secure services process is normally not running. The scanner hitting port 443 starts it up and it stays active for a little while before going back to sleep. The same thing happens in other systems. The scan can affect the product. Hopefully not in any disastrous way. I'm just saying that IP scanners can cause devices (not just JNIORs) some concern. A passive scanner collecting for instance broadcasted ARP requests would be a lot safer. An advanced IP scanner designed to be used buy IT departments in policing their networks may be a bit of overkill and comes with a risk. We have JNIORs hanging on cellular modems in other markets. In those instances we work to keep bandwidth and therefore cellular charges to a minimum. We have seen elevated cellular costs not because of the JNIOR but due to port scanners repeatedly waking the connection. Obviously not a cinema thing but you see that an IP scanner is not always a noninvasive diagnostic tool. Just saying.  |  IP: Logged Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 10-16-2019 11:10 AM                     Yeah, you should not like, run an nmap on all your devices. Your Dolby CP650 won't like it also, for example. Those machines have CPUs that are like 1000 times slower than what many of us have in their mobile phone, so if you bug them with portscans, they're not going to be happy with you. Passively collecting ARP traffic will usually take a whole lot longer than actively scanning, but I think that scanners that simply send out a single or a few ICMP (like no more than 3 per IP) packets at every IP address in a range are generally harmless, unless you put a small interval of a few milliseconds between each packet.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.