On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 19:58:57 +0100, "Happy Hunter" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
I worked on the basis that if the wireless machines found
>> the AP, connected and authenticated (and could connect to the router
>> diag port) then that should be sufficient?
>
>In your case yes. If you've only got the one AP and it's the hub as well
>(and the DHCP server), then yes I'd agree, if connected to AP and can
>connect to router diag port (via something like I.E and so proving the
>network connectivity) then all should be OK.
Well, *my* std system is (currently) Q-Tec (g) WiFi cable router
(giving DHCP etc) but actually getting WiFi access via a Netgear AP
(b). When testing my mates Netgear WiFi router (g) I just disconnected
from my network and re-connected to his (same machines, workgroup, I/P
- DHCP scope etc etc).
Pinging each machine from a dos
>prompt will prove that they are seeing each other at a basic network
>connectivity level.
I did try the "run, \\machinename " command and that normally give
the connection a poke if one is needed but apart from another
frustrating wait, nothing ;-(
>
>Had lot's of funnies on my nephews PC connecting wirelessly, but this was
>down to a combination of problems. It would connect wirelessly to it's
>nearest AP, but then got stuck "aquiring network address", ie it didn't get
>it's IP address from the DHCP server which was a separate device.
On my Netgear AP you can set if it or another device handles the DHCP
... (it can also be a DHCP client but I have it set to 'static' outside
my normal DHCP scope.
It then
>defaulted to the microsoft default "private network address" 169.x.x.x.
>Also had lots of "not connecting problems".
I think I have seen that when the encryptionn isn't correct (proven by
turning it off for a while)? It makes the wireless connection but
can't pass data?
>
>Basically summed up as ... PC on the limit of the receiving of the wireless
>signal (so intermittent results) AND me using a netgear cable router as an
>AP (from the days when I had cable broadband .. sigh ... on ISDN at the
>moment awaiting adsl). The netgear cable router was p1ssed at being used as
>an AP (must have been insulted) and every so often (well, err quite often)
>refused to forward DHCP requests onto the DHCP server (which is my ISDN
>router), so connected ok to the AP, but no IP address. Fixed by moving one
>of my APs closer to my nephews PC and swapping in a "proper" AP and moving
>the netgear cable router to another point on the network (so it now irrates
>my sisters laptop but it's at a point in the house where it can be switched
>on and off easily, when ADSL arrives, I'll retire this old cable router.)
I has a similat 'funny' with my little D-Link cable router that fist
started showing 'problems' when I got a new Acer laptop. Long story
short it seemed to have issues re DHCP and some of the newer NIC's /
chipsets. If my neighbour turned on his DHCP server (Linux box /
Smoothwall) it would pickup i/p stuff every time? When the Acer got
DHCP from his server it was always the *upper* address from the scope
rather than the lower / first available (and that was probably what
was throwing the Dlink box?
>
>When I was a nipper, we only had the dos prompt.
(me too) ;-)
Can be useful to bypass the
>microsoft browsing function and the good old dos prompt sometimes gives
>better error messages or better clues as to what is going wrong.
Indeed ;-)
>
>> My desktop kept seeing my wifes PC that was no longer connected.
>
>That's normal I'd say and usually followed by "crap didn't mean to click
>that PC" .. and it then takes ages to come back and say "can't find it".
lol ... how true! Click, click, click DOH! <egg timer>
.................
>>
>> Does sound like browsing doesn't it?
>
>Yes. Might be worth a browse around the MS Knowledge base to see if anything
>pops up. I'd did skip by something saying how to stop a specific machine
>becoming the master browser when you've got mixed operating systems (I think
>win 98x was a problem for some reason or other).
I'm tempted to just try some 802.11g units for the PC's and there may
be a wireless isssue as well?
>
>I've got a mix or wired/wireless on my network and it's ok, but being
>honest, my machines "connect at logon" to any shared resources they need to
>access, so I don't that often use the "browsing" function as it's so slow
>and wrong half the time.
I have a regular remote (wireless) client and that has no probs at
all, once I had found a good combination of device / ant / spec etc
etc.
>
>>
>> I'll try to get everything set up on a desk and do some more thorough
>> (logged) tests .. or just get my mate to run some cables ;-)
>>
>
>good luck !
I think 'luck' is a good word where wireless ( being 'unbound media')
is involved! ;-(
All the best ..
T i m
|