Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
John Doe II

About the Canon C200

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, ChrisRoss said:

There is no precision involved, you just screw it in  and tighten it, but if you are not confident I guess there is no harm in getting the dealer to do it.  The only thing to be aware of is the same standard of o-ring cleanliness as you use for the main housing o-ring which you service yourself all the time.  If the housing holds a vacuum after installation, you are all set.

OK well that is good to know. There is of course a vacuum system fitted to the C200 housing by default so that all helps. I have been in touch with Saga re the WACP on a Subal but will take that over to the right forum section. Not going to bother with WACP on the Seacam housing since I have the Nikonos seacam conversion lens for that housing. It has taken a long time to get all this gear together but almost there now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Barmaglot said:

This isn't black magic; the procedure described sounds like the camera is set up to pull a DHCP lease, but with a direct connection between workstation and camera and no DHCP server involved, it times out and falls back to APIPA (automatic private IP address) - that's why it takes several minutes, for both the camera and the workstation to time out on DHCP discovery and assign themselves something in the 169.254.0.1 - 169.254.255.254 range, with a /16 subnet. Once this happens, you configure the random address as static, and the application autodiscovers the camera, probably by the means of network broadcast. It reads as a result of someone randomly poking around in the dark with no idea of what they're doing - you can arrive to the same result much faster by either configuring static IPs in the same subnet to begin with (and with a direct connection, you can go as small as a /30 subnet, instead of a /16), or by running a DHCP server on your machine.

Do you think it would help at all to use a class A subnet IP instead of a class C ? Get right away from the 192.168.x.x ranges ?? something simple like 10.10.0.1 /29 ? So as you say, static IP's on each end with a small number of useable IP's like a /29.

That might do away with all the hunting for the IP's that the camera seems to be doing. And if that is indeed useful then as you say a /30 is even better - be faster for the camera's IP tables to scan (it will most likely be a linux variant of OS onboard the camera ...possibly BSD .... and if that is the case it would be using some form of IP Tables). It does seem to be some IP address issue though. 

 

Edited by John Doe II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, John Doe II said:

Do you think it would help at all to use a class A subnet IP instead of a class C ? Get right away from the 192.168.x.x ranges ?? something simple like 10.10.0.1 /29 ? So as you say, static IP's on each end with a small number of useable IP's like a /29.

Classful routing hasn't been a thing since sometime in the 80s. That said, unless something is hardcoded in that camera in some weird fashion, it shouldn't matter which subnet you use for what is effectively a point to point link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, John Doe II said:

I am not quite sure what the 169.x.x.x range is all about - generally when you get a 169.x.x.x the connection is not getting through.

It's not 169.x.x.x, it's 169.254.0.0/16, which is reserved for link-local addresses/APIPA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserved_IP_addresses

https://study-ccna.com/apipa-automatic-private-ip-addressing/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Barmaglot said:

Classful routing hasn't been a thing since sometime in the 80s. That said, unless something is hardcoded in that camera in some weird fashion, it shouldn't matter which subnet you use for what is effectively a point to point link.

we use 10 and 172 ranges all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, John Doe II said:

we use 10 and 172 ranges all the time.

Yes, but they're not class A/B/C/whatever; those have been retired long, long ago. People use 'classes' as shorthand for /8, /16 and /24 subnet masks, but that is incorrect.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Barmaglot said:

Yes, but they're not class A/B/C/whatever; those have been retired long, long ago. People use 'classes' as shorthand for /8, /16 and /24 subnet masks, but that is incorrect.

 

Techs at the teleport always referred to them as class A/B/C. we just followed suit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...