Vista host, Windows guests, 2.2.0 update networking issues

[renichms]

Host OS: Windows Vista Home Premium
Guests OSs: Windows XP Pro, Vista Business, Server 2003

Problem: With the last version, I used remote desktop with my virtual machines (remotely connected to the virtual machines). I updated and first had to figure out how to get it to start a guest at all since it said I was out of memory (nowhere near out but it thought so). After reducing memory for the guest (which worked fine before with more), I find out the network interfaces for the virtual machines were butchered. It doesn't come remotely close to working. I tried playing with the new settings and not a single setting lets it get an address from the DHCP server that is also serving my host OS like it used to. Someone mentioned "bridged" is like the old setting that acted basically as a pass-thru with the host but unfortunately, "bridged" does not work at all - it does not even allow it to remain selected and click OK to close the settings page.

So my question is this: how do I use these new networking types to get it back to the way it was? For example, if the host OS is given the address 192.168.3.100, the virtual machine could receive 192.168.3.101. Now it isn't possible. And if it can't be fixed, can I safely uninstall 2.2.0, find the old version again and go back to it since 2.2.0 has some serious issues? I really like being able to use the memory I have instead of being told there isn't enough when there is and I would like to be able to remotely connect again (not understanding why it is a perfectly functional setup had to be messed with either).

RN

[Perryg]

Reinstall VBox as (administrator) and select the repair function. If you still have problems please let us know.

[renichms]

Reinstall VBox as (administrator) and select the repair function. If you still have problems please let us know.

It still gets an address completely unrelated to the external DHCP server. What was the version number of the VirtualBox that came immediately before 2.2.0?

RN

EDIT: Nevermind...I forgot that it said it was changing the files to work with the new version. I can't go back to the functional old version, can I?

EDIT2: Sorry for the hyper editing...it is allowing bridging now so I'm going to try that and will edit again with results.

[Perryg]

I was fairly sure that would work. Now if you really need NAT to work before the next release you need to set it up in the second adapter instead of the first one. There was a bug in 2.2.0 that will be repaired in 2.2.*

[renichms]

I was fairly sure that would work. Now if you really need NAT to work before the next release you need to set it up in the second adapter instead of the first one. There was a bug in 2.2.0 that will be repaired in 2.2.*

Your repair option did the trick. Bridging finally worked and it finally got an IP from the external DHCP server. Since I've seen this problem several times, maybe there should be a help file or entry or something somewhere to let people know to try that?

RN

[Perryg]

It is all over the forums. Once it was figured out people have been told over and over. I would think a search would find it.

[renichms]

It is all over the forums. Once it was figured out people have been told over and over. I would think a search would find it.

I saw the issue come up again and again but no one saying to use repair.

RN

[Perryg]

No problem. Here is a quick way to search this forum and works better than the built in search.
In a Google search enter what is my question site:forums.virtualbox.org
We are fully indexed and it works a lot better to find things here.

[renichms]

No problem. Here is a quick way to search this forum and works better than the built in search.
In a Google search enter what is my question site:forums.virtualbox.org
We are fully indexed and it works a lot better to find things here.

So, for example, "which version came before 2.2.0 site:forums.virtualbox.org" or "which version came before 2.2.0 forums.virtualbox.org"?

RN

[Perryg]

Now you have it.

[renichms]

Now you have it.

Thanks! Tried both forms and "site:" is definitely required.

RN