Belkin Pre-N notebook card problems

I have had a Belkin Pre-N router and a Pre-N notebook card for several
months now. Up until recently, my laptop has been running Windows 2000, and
I was forced to use a free WPA-PSK client available from McAfee in order to
support WPS-PSK security. In any event, I've had rather flawless
connectivity and excellent data rates with the Pre-N using WPA-PSK.

The other day, I decided to upgrade the OS on the laptop to XP(SP2). After
a fresh install of XP, I installed the Pre-N notebook card software and
drivers. Since then, I've had absolutely lousy connectivity either by using
the Belkin application, or by letting Windows manage the wireless
connection. When I do achieve connectivity, it's at a few Kbps - even when
in the same room with the router. Does anyone have any suggestions as to
what may be wrong with my configuration, and what I might do to to correct
it? Thanks.

[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <WJ9if.15671$0h5.9617@dukeread10> on Sat, 26 Nov 2005 22:28:49 -0500,
"J&SB" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I have had a Belkin Pre-N router and a Pre-N notebook card for several
>months now. Up until recently, my laptop has been running Windows 2000, and
>I was forced to use a free WPA-PSK client available from McAfee in order to
>support WPS-PSK security. In any event, I've had rather flawless
>connectivity and excellent data rates with the Pre-N using WPA-PSK.
>
>The other day, I decided to upgrade the OS on the laptop to XP(SP2). After
>a fresh install of XP, I installed the Pre-N notebook card software and
>drivers. Since then, I've had absolutely lousy connectivity either by using
>the Belkin application, or by letting Windows manage the wireless
>connection. When I do achieve connectivity, it's at a few Kbps - even when
>in the same room with the router. Does anyone have any suggestions as to
>what may be wrong with my configuration, and what I might do to to correct
>it? Thanks.

Signal strength?

Any other networks on the same channel?

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

J&SB wrote:

> I have had a Belkin Pre-N router and a Pre-N notebook card for
> several months now. Up until recently, my laptop has been running
> Windows 2000, and I was forced to use a free WPA-PSK client available
> from McAfee in order to support WPS-PSK security. In any event, I've
> had rather flawless connectivity and excellent data rates with the
> Pre-N using WPA-PSK.
>
> The other day, I decided to upgrade the OS on the laptop to XP(SP2).
> After a fresh install of XP, I installed the Pre-N notebook card
> software and drivers. Since then, I've had absolutely lousy
> connectivity either by using the Belkin application, or by letting
> Windows manage the wireless connection. When I do achieve
> connectivity, it's at a few Kbps - even when in the same room with
> the router. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what may be
> wrong with my configuration, and what I might do to to correct it?
> Thanks.

From my experiences, poor network speed is most often due to firewall
or antivirus settings.

Turn them off and see how it performs.

Eg. Avast antivirus reduces my network speed enormously if the network
scanner module is enabled.

Also make sure that the XP firewall is off.

Cheers

Rob

J&SB wrote:
> I have had a Belkin Pre-N router and a Pre-N notebook card for several
> months now. Up until recently, my laptop has been running Windows
> 2000, and I was forced to use a free WPA-PSK client available from
> McAfee in order to support WPS-PSK security. In any event, I've had
> rather flawless connectivity and excellent data rates with the Pre-N
> using WPA-PSK.
> The other day, I decided to upgrade the OS on the laptop to XP(SP2).
> After a fresh install of XP, I installed the Pre-N notebook card
> software and drivers. Since then, I've had absolutely lousy
> connectivity either by using the Belkin application, or by letting
> Windows manage the wireless connection. When I do achieve
> connectivity, it's at a few Kbps - even when in the same room with
> the router. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what may be
> wrong with my configuration, and what I might do to to correct it?
> Thanks.

Google for winsockxpfix.exe and run it to reset the TCP/IP stack. Do
also what has been suggested for firewall, anti-virus, etc. You might
(probably already have done this?) reset the router to basic config
until you get the connection issues resolved. Run the wireless network
wizard sometimes helps if you have been setting up manually. Wireless
Zero Configuration service should be disabled if using the Belkin
utility. Likewise the Belkin utility must not be running of using WZC.
The wireless networking wizard needs WZC.

Check all of the wireless settings: uncheck 802.11x authentication,
select infrastructure only, disable autoconnect to non-preferred
networks. Make sure your network is the only entry in Preferred
networks.

Looks like a combination of 3 things. First off, connectivity was just fine
this morning when I booted up the laptop. There must have been excessive
interference yesterday in the neighborhood. Secondly, I turned off the
Windows firewall and throughput indeed improved. Lastly, changed to AES on
the WPA-PSK and got the most noticeable increase in data rate. Things look
just fine now. Thanks to everyone for their suggestions.


"J&SB" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:WJ9if.15671$0h5.9617@dukeread10...
>I have had a Belkin Pre-N router and a Pre-N notebook card for several
>months now. Up until recently, my laptop has been running Windows 2000,
>and I was forced to use a free WPA-PSK client available from McAfee in
>order to support WPS-PSK security. In any event, I've had rather flawless
>connectivity and excellent data rates with the Pre-N using WPA-PSK.
>
> The other day, I decided to upgrade the OS on the laptop to XP(SP2).
> After a fresh install of XP, I installed the Pre-N notebook card software
> and drivers. Since then, I've had absolutely lousy connectivity either by
> using the Belkin application, or by letting Windows manage the wireless
> connection. When I do achieve connectivity, it's at a few Kbps - even
> when in the same room with the router. Does anyone have any suggestions
> as to what may be wrong with my configuration, and what I might do to to
> correct it? Thanks.
>

[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <(E-Mail Removed)> on 27 Nov 2005 22:05:49 +1050, "me here"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>From my experiences, poor network speed is most often due to firewall
>or antivirus settings.
>
>Turn them off and see how it performs.
>
>Eg. Avast antivirus reduces my network speed enormously if the network
>scanner module is enabled.
>
>Also make sure that the XP firewall is off.

Really, really bad idea! The XP Firewall is an important security tool that
doesn't measurably hurt performance. You might as well drive without brakes
so that you can go faster.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

John Navas wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <(E-Mail Removed)> on 27 Nov 2005 22:05:49 +1050,
> "me here" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > From my experiences, poor network speed is most often due to
> > firewall or antivirus settings.
> >
> > Turn them off and see how it performs.
> >
> > Eg. Avast antivirus reduces my network speed enormously if the
> > network scanner module is enabled.
> >
> > Also make sure that the XP firewall is off.
>
> Really, really bad idea! The XP Firewall is an important security
> tool that doesn't measurably hurt performance. You might as well
> drive without brakes so that you can go faster.


Get a life.

If you have a decent firewall, then you dont use the XP one...its shit.

Also this is for testing only.

I dont see any suggestions comming from you.

Rob

[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <(E-Mail Removed)> on 28 Nov 2005 12:09:06 +1050, "me here"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>John Navas wrote:
>
>> In <(E-Mail Removed)> on 27 Nov 2005 22:05:49 +1050,
>> "me here" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>> > From my experiences, poor network speed is most often due to
>> > firewall or antivirus settings.
>> >
>> > Turn them off and see how it performs.
>> >
>> > Eg. Avast antivirus reduces my network speed enormously if the
>> > network scanner module is enabled.
>> >
>> > Also make sure that the XP firewall is off.
>>
>> Really, really bad idea! The XP Firewall is an important security
>> tool that doesn't measurably hurt performance. You might as well
>> drive without brakes so that you can go faster.
>
>Get a life.

Got one, thanks.

>If you have a decent firewall, then you dont use the XP one...its shit.

It's actually pretty good.

>Also this is for testing only.

Fair enough.

>I dont see any suggestions comming from you.

Then you're not paying attention.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

John Navas wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <(E-Mail Removed)> on 28 Nov 2005 12:09:06 +1050,
> "me here" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > John Navas wrote:
> >
> >> In <(E-Mail Removed)> on 27 Nov 2005 22:05:49 +1050,
> >> "me here" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >>
> >> > From my experiences, poor network speed is most often due to
> >> > firewall or antivirus settings.
> >> >
> >> > Turn them off and see how it performs.
> >> >
> >> > Eg. Avast antivirus reduces my network speed enormously if the
> >> > network scanner module is enabled.
> >> >
> >> > Also make sure that the XP firewall is off.
> >>
> >> Really, really bad idea! The XP Firewall is an important security
> >> tool that doesn't measurably hurt performance. You might as well
> >> drive without brakes so that you can go faster.
> >
> > Get a life.
>
> Got one, thanks.
>
> > If you have a decent firewall, then you dont use the XP one...its
> > shit.
>
> It's actually pretty good.
>
> > Also this is for testing only.
>
> Fair enough.
>
> > I dont see any suggestions comming from you.
>
> Then you're not paying attention.


I'd be interested to know how you intend to test the effect of the
firewall on a given situation (problem) without turning it off.

In this case the "actually pretty good" XP firewall appears to have
been a culprit.

Rob

[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <(E-Mail Removed)> on 29 Nov 2005 16:29:25 +1050, "me here"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>John Navas wrote:
>
>> In <(E-Mail Removed)> on 28 Nov 2005 12:09:06 +1050,
>> "me here" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>> > John Navas wrote:
>> >
>> >> In <(E-Mail Removed)> on 27 Nov 2005 22:05:49 +1050,
>> >> "me here" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> >> > Also make sure that the XP firewall is off.
>> >>
>> >> Really, really bad idea! The XP Firewall is an important security
>> >> tool that doesn't measurably hurt performance. You might as well
>> >> drive without brakes so that you can go faster.
>> >
>> > Get a life.
>>
>> Got one, thanks.
>>
>> > If you have a decent firewall, then you dont use the XP one...its
>> > shit.
>>
>> It's actually pretty good.
>>
>> > Also this is for testing only.
>>
>> Fair enough.
>>
>> > I dont see any suggestions comming from you.
>>
>> Then you're not paying attention.
>
>I'd be interested to know how you intend to test the effect of the
>firewall on a given situation (problem) without turning it off.

I didn't say not to test it -- I responded to your categorical advice to turn
it off.

>In this case the "actually pretty good" XP firewall appears to have
>been a culprit.

I doubt it. It was probably something else.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>