Wireless Woes under RH9.0 Destination Host Unreachable

I have experienced all the frustration I have seen others post and not
found an answer. By reading the existing stuff, the card doesnt seem
to be the issue, since many seem to have the same problems. My case
is this: Everything looks good under ifconfig and iwconfig, but I
can't talk to the network. Default route is good, ESSID is good,
configuration recognizes the router's MAC. There are plenty of TX and
RX packets. I gave eth0 a static ip.

I ran ethereal with a filter of "src 192.168.0.1" (the router/access
point) and noticed only UDP and ARP. UDP packets were RIPv1. Why
won't the router have a reasonable conversation with my interface?
Any ideas?

Thanks.

Steven Schmidt <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> I have experienced all the frustration I have seen others post and not
> found an answer. By reading the existing stuff, the card doesnt seem
> to be the issue, since many seem to have the same problems. My case
> is this: Everything looks good under ifconfig and iwconfig, but I
> can't talk to the network. Default route is good, ESSID is good,
> configuration recognizes the router's MAC. There are plenty of TX and
> RX packets. I gave eth0 a static ip.

If there are plenty of Tx and Rx packets, then you are on the network.

> I ran ethereal with a filter of "src 192.168.0.1" (the router/access
> point) and noticed only UDP and ARP. UDP packets were RIPv1. Why

FROM WHOM?

If you see *other* machines packets, then you are on the network. Full
stop.

> won't the router have a reasonable conversation with my interface?

Routers don't converse. Are you saying that you see the router asking
via arp for you? Or other machines asking via arp for you? (such as
would occur if they tried to ping you).

If you see then asking for you via arp, and you don't reply, then you
have a problem. You should reply to arp. You can force arp for yourself
anyway (via arp or rarp even :-).

Let us know the particulars of your problem, and you will get a
particular answer.

Peter

Had the same problem, It doesnt sound like you are on the network, Im
guessing you cant pull a DHCP address which is why you set static?

Are you using any wep? if so try turing off wep and then see if you can
pull an IP via dhcp.

I got so frustrated with RH9 and my cisco wireless card I just
downloaded Suse 9 and it was ALL GOOD.

RH9 and cisco cards do not like eachother. In fact from all ive seen rh9
out of the box doesnt like dealing with wireless and wep period.



Steven Schmidt wrote:
> I have experienced all the frustration I have seen others post and not
> found an answer. By reading the existing stuff, the card doesnt seem
> to be the issue, since many seem to have the same problems. My case
> is this: Everything looks good under ifconfig and iwconfig, but I
> can't talk to the network. Default route is good, ESSID is good,
> configuration recognizes the router's MAC. There are plenty of TX and
> RX packets. I gave eth0 a static ip.
>
> I ran ethereal with a filter of "src 192.168.0.1" (the router/access
> point) and noticed only UDP and ARP. UDP packets were RIPv1. Why
> won't the router have a reasonable conversation with my interface?
> Any ideas?
>
> Thanks.

The scan showed network traffic but pings to the router didn't go over
the interface, just 'network unreachable'. Its like the redhat box is
a fly on the wall watching the net but invisible to it. As I said,
the scan was for packets with source 192.168.0.1, so 'from whom' is
the router.

(E-Mail Removed) (P.T. Breuer) wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> Steven Schmidt <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > I have experienced all the frustration I have seen others post and not
> > found an answer. By reading the existing stuff, the card doesnt seem
> > to be the issue, since many seem to have the same problems. My case
> > is this: Everything looks good under ifconfig and iwconfig, but I
> > can't talk to the network. Default route is good, ESSID is good,
> > configuration recognizes the router's MAC. There are plenty of TX and
> > RX packets. I gave eth0 a static ip.
>
> If there are plenty of Tx and Rx packets, then you are on the network.
>
> > I ran ethereal with a filter of "src 192.168.0.1" (the router/access
> > point) and noticed only UDP and ARP. UDP packets were RIPv1. Why
>
> FROM WHOM?
>
> If you see *other* machines packets, then you are on the network. Full
> stop.
>
> > won't the router have a reasonable conversation with my interface?
>
> Routers don't converse. Are you saying that you see the router asking
> via arp for you? Or other machines asking via arp for you? (such as
> would occur if they tried to ping you).
>
> If you see then asking for you via arp, and you don't reply, then you
> have a problem. You should reply to arp. You can force arp for yourself
> anyway (via arp or rarp even :-).
>
> Let us know the particulars of your problem, and you will get a
> particular answer.
>
> Peter

I had suse on the box before but needed to use redhat for something
else. I had no trouble with the prism-2 card under suse, but gave up
trying to get it working under RH9. My problems now are trying to use
a Netgear MA101 usb with the ATMEL driver. Seems almost there but not
quite.


"Mike C. " <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<gfidnR16HJqe4nOiRVn-(E-Mail Removed)>...
> Had the same problem, It doesnt sound like you are on the network, Im
> guessing you cant pull a DHCP address which is why you set static?
>
> Are you using any wep? if so try turing off wep and then see if you can
> pull an IP via dhcp.
>
> I got so frustrated with RH9 and my cisco wireless card I just
> downloaded Suse 9 and it was ALL GOOD.
>
> RH9 and cisco cards do not like eachother. In fact from all ive seen rh9
> out of the box doesnt like dealing with wireless and wep period.
>
>
>
> Steven Schmidt wrote:
> > I have experienced all the frustration I have seen others post and not
> > found an answer. By reading the existing stuff, the card doesnt seem
> > to be the issue, since many seem to have the same problems. My case
> > is this: Everything looks good under ifconfig and iwconfig, but I
> > can't talk to the network. Default route is good, ESSID is good,
> > configuration recognizes the router's MAC. There are plenty of TX and
> > RX packets. I gave eth0 a static ip.
> >
> > I ran ethereal with a filter of "src 192.168.0.1" (the router/access
> > point) and noticed only UDP and ARP. UDP packets were RIPv1. Why
> > won't the router have a reasonable conversation with my interface?
> > Any ideas?
> >
> > Thanks.

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 08:35:33 -0800, Steven Schmidt wrote:

> The scan showed network traffic but pings to the router didn't go over
> the interface, just 'network unreachable'. Its like the redhat box is
> a fly on the wall watching the net but invisible to it. As I said,
> the scan was for packets with source 192.168.0.1, so 'from whom' is
> the router.

I'm afraid I can't help you at all with this: I've got exactly the same
problem, from the sound of it. Using tcpdump I can see other traffic from
other machines on the network but if I try anything myself, I get
"Destination Host Unreachable". When trying to ping my router, the arp
packets go out, the router sends a ARP reply, but my box ignores the
reply, so sends out another arp request. If I manually enter the arp reply
data into the kernel arp cache then the ping packet goes out, the router
sends a reply, but my box just ignores the reply.

I'm running slackware-9.1 (2.4.22 kernel) with a Linksys WPC11v4 card
using the Windows XP drivers through linuxant (maps the drive NDIS API to
the linux kernel).

What's your setup, by the way?

I've been suspecting a interrupt issue - normally when I start tcpdump and
start pinging, it's not until I kill the ping process that I get a flood
of backdated arp requests showing up in tcpdump - I'm guessing the data is
sitting in some buffer somewhere. I've just got this vague suspicion that
this is somehow related to a IRQ conflict, although I don't see any other
evidence of an IRQ conflict.

I tried playing with my /etc/pcmcia/config.opts file to get the wireless
card to use a different interrupt, but to no avail, the card seems intent
on using IRQ11.

Does anyone have any ideas? The laptop can "see" the packets, it just
won't "listen"...