Unable to connect to my wireless lan

Hi all

I haven't been able to connect to my wireless lan using my new
notebook (HP/Compaq nx7010 with intel pro 2100 3b mini pci card for
wireless access)

My wireless network is served up by a billion Bipac-743 GE
adslmodem/router/wireless hub unit

windows XP professional is installed on the notebook. I have applied
the patch from (http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=826942)

My old notebook which uses a Minitar PCI card for wireless is able to
connect without hassle. when I go into the advanced properties for my
wireless network connection, no networks appear available.

I have tried manually adding a network (with the SSID) but that didn't
work.
I have also tried executing "ipconfig /renew" to try to get it to
work.
My wireless lan does not 'hide' its SSID.
the HP site tells me there are no available updates for my software so
i guess this means my drivers for the mini pci card are up to date?

Any help would be appreciated. How do I troubleshoot this??

Michael

> I have also tried executing "ipconfig /renew" to try to get it to
> work.

You even getting a valid IP when doing the IPconfig? You are not getting an
IP that starts with 169.?

Duane

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 12:45:05 GMT, Duane Arnold spoketh

>
>> I have also tried executing "ipconfig /renew" to try to get it to
>> work.
>
>You even getting a valid IP when doing the IPconfig? You are not getting an
>IP that starts with 169.?
>
>Duane
>

169.254.x.x are not invalid IP addresses. If a computer is set to DHCP
and there's no DHCP server available, the computer will assign itself an
IP address in the 169.254.0.0/16 range. If you have several computers on
a LAN with no DHCP server, they'll assign themselves unique IP addresses
in that range, giving you an instant, working LAN without the use of a
DHCP server...

Lars M. Hansen
www.hansenonline.net
Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
"If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"

> 169.254.x.x are not invalid IP addresses. If a computer is set to DHCP
> and there's no DHCP server available, the computer will assign itself an
> IP address in the 169.254.0.0/16 range. If you have several computers on
> a LAN with no DHCP server, they'll assign themselves unique IP addresses
> in that range, giving you an instant, working LAN without the use of a
> DHCP server...

So why did you say they are invalid?! 169.254.x.x are perfectly valid
addresses, just might not be what was intended.



David.

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 15:32:14 -0000, David Taylor spoketh

>> 169.254.x.x are not invalid IP addresses. If a computer is set to DHCP
>> and there's no DHCP server available, the computer will assign itself an
>> IP address in the 169.254.0.0/16 range. If you have several computers on
>> a LAN with no DHCP server, they'll assign themselves unique IP addresses
>> in that range, giving you an instant, working LAN without the use of a
>> DHCP server...
>
>So why did you say they are invalid?! 169.254.x.x are perfectly valid
>addresses, just might not be what was intended.
>
>
>
>David.

I didn't ...


Lars M. Hansen
www.hansenonline.net
Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
"If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"

Lars M. Hansen <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news(E-Mail Removed):

> On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 12:45:05 GMT, Duane Arnold spoketh
>
>>
>>> I have also tried executing "ipconfig /renew" to try to get it to
>>> work.
>>
>>You even getting a valid IP when doing the IPconfig? You are not
>>getting an IP that starts with 169.?
>>
>>Duane
>>
>
> 169.254.x.x are not invalid IP addresses. If a computer is set to DHCP
> and there's no DHCP server available, the computer will assign itself
> an IP address in the 169.254.0.0/16 range. If you have several
> computers on a LAN with no DHCP server, they'll assign themselves
> unique IP addresses in that range, giving you an instant, working LAN
> without the use of a DHCP server...
>
> Lars M. Hansen
> www.hansenonline.net
> Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
> "If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"
>

I know this Lars. In fact, I could access any machine on the LAN with the
machine that had the 169. IP. It's an invalid IP that's going to allow
the machine to access the WAN. If the IP is not going to release when
doing a IPconfig /rel /renew in an attempt to access the WAN, then it is
invalid. However, you're correct that it's a valid IP in the pure
definition and usage of the 169. IP.

Duane

> I didn't ...
>
>
> Lars M. Hansen

Panto time, OH YES YOU DID!

169.254.x.x are not invalid IP addresses. If a computer is set to DHCP
and there's no DHCP server available, the computer will assign itself an
IP address in the 169.254.0.0/16 range. If you have several computers on
a LAN with no DHCP server, they'll assign themselves unique IP addresses
in that range, giving you an instant, working LAN without the use of a
DHCP server...

Lars M. Hansen
www.hansenonline.net

> I didn't ...

Poop, brain fart, can you please quit with the double negatives.

> machine that had the 169. IP. It's an invalid IP that's going to allow
> the machine to access the WAN. If the IP is not going to release when
> doing a IPconfig /rel /renew in an attempt to access the WAN, then it is

No need to even IPconfig/rel/renew. MS DHCP protocol retries every 5
mins.

It's not invalid, ever period.

(Sorry Lars!)

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 10:53:45 -0000, David Taylor spoketh

>> I didn't ...
>
>Poop, brain fart, can you please quit with the double negatives.

Well, I guess "not invalid" could be re-written as "valid"...

Lars M. Hansen
www.hansenonline.net
Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
"If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"