wireless signal "weaker" in Linux than Windows - Mandriva

This is a discussion on wireless signal "weaker" in Linux than Windows - Mandriva ; Bit Twister wrote: > On Sun, 2 Nov 2008 16:44:17 +0000 (UTC), Bit Twister wrote: > > Opps, module is there > # lsmod | grep ipv6 > ipv6 241540 21 nf_conntrack_h323 > > but I have yet to have ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: wireless signal "weaker" in Linux than Windows

  1. Re: wireless signal "weaker" in Linux than Windows

    Bit Twister wrote:
    > On Sun, 2 Nov 2008 16:44:17 +0000 (UTC), Bit Twister wrote:
    >
    > Opps, module is there
    > # lsmod | grep ipv6
    > ipv6 241540 21 nf_conntrack_h323
    >
    > but I have yet to have slow dns look ups via firefox with no firefox changes.


    Well, I don't think you need a change in FF if (some of) the other fixes
    are present.

    As long as you are not experiencing slowdowns, you are good to go.

    On my side, before getting Moe_Trin's fix, I was really frustrated at
    the sluggishness in wireless speed, compared to Windows.

    Anyway, I am running all 3 fixes (surely an overkill@!) and things look
    back to "normal".

  2. Re: wireless signal "weaker" in Linux than Windows

    Bit Twister wrote:
    > On Sun, 2 Nov 2008 16:44:17 +0000 (UTC), Bit Twister wrote:
    >> On Sun, 2 Nov 2008 16:08:43 +0000 (UTC), stef wrote:
    >>> I note that even after having applied the NETWORKING_IPV6=no fix, lsmod |
    >>> grep ipv6 still showed an ipv6 module loaded.

    >
    > Opps, module is there
    > # lsmod | grep ipv6
    > ipv6 241540 21 nf_conntrack_h323
    >
    > but I have yet to have slow dns look ups via firefox with no firefox changes.


    Look what I found in the errata link you sent me today:

    > Pv6 issues
    >
    > See also Image:bug_small.png Bug #27070. There is a known problem with all Linux distributions that enable IPv6 networking (the new standard for network addresses which uses a longer, hexadecimal address format to provide a much larger number of possible addresses. The old standard is IPv4, which gives the four-groups-of-three-digits decimal address format most people are familiar with, e.g. 216.105.167.65). Some systems and networks do not cope well if your system has IPv6 networking enabled. If you experience sluggish response on the Internet - especially when browsing web sites - and cannot find the cause, you should try disabling IPv6. To do this, edit the file /etc/modprobe.conf, add the following line, and reboot:
    >
    > install ipv6 /bin/true
    >

    From:



  3. Re: wireless signal "weaker" in Linux than Windows

    On Mon, 03 Nov 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.os.linux.mandriva, in article
    , stef wrote:

    >Look what I found in the errata link you sent me today:


    >> Pv6 issues
    >>
    >> See also Image:bug_small.png Bug #27070. There is a known problem
    >> with all Linux distributions that enable IPv6 networking


    Actually, it's true for all _operating_systems_ that have IPv6 enabled.

    >> (the new standard for network addresses which uses a longer,
    >> hexadecimal address format to provide a much larger number of
    >> possible addresses. The old standard is IPv4, which gives the
    >> four-groups-of-three-digits decimal address format most people are
    >> familiar with, e.g. 216.105.167.65).


    As opposed to 2001:0DB8:1234:5678:9ABCEF0EAD:BEEF, or a local
    address that might look like FE80::20:AF88:3C89 (the "::" means zeros
    are here or 'FE80:0000:0000:0000:0000:0020:AF88:3C89' - it's a form
    of abbreviation).

    >Some systems and networks do not cope well if your system has IPv6
    >networking enabled.


    Translation: Despite the fact that IPv6 dates from December 1995 (see
    RFC1883, which has been replaced by RFC2460 in December 1998), some
    manufacturers, software authors and network administrators haven't
    gotten the word yet.

    Comment: The reason for IPv6 is that we're running low on the existing
    IPv4 addresses. If you ignore special addresses (described in RFC3330)
    there are 3,706,453,504 addresses available. As of the middle of last
    month, 2,719,567,336 have been allocated or assigned to various users,
    which is 73.37% of what's available. 12 months ago, the percentage was
    only 68.89%, while 22 months ago it was 65.09%. Some people (such as
    Vint Cerf, the author or co-author of 43 RFCs) suggest that we'll run
    out of IPv4 addresses by 2010. Part of the reason is that they
    _were_ handing out IPv4 addresses like water - do you realize that
    127.0.0.0 through 127.255.255.255 (16.78 million addresses) all refer
    to ONE computer? IPv6 offers a _LOT_ more addresses to play with as
    the addresses are 128 bits = 340282366920938463463374607431768211456
    or 3.403e38 addresses. It's estimated that there are 6.6e9 people in
    the world - 1.78 people for each IPv4 address, or 51.2e27 IPv6
    addresses per person (meaning one for you and every ant you've ever
    seen) which should be enough for a few more years. However, you may
    want to look at RFC1606 "A Historical Perspective On The Usage Of IP
    Version 9" from 1 April, 1994.

    Old guy

  4. Re: wireless signal "weaker" in Linux than Windows

    Moe Trin wrote:
    It's estimated that there are 6.6e9 people in
    > the world - 1.78 people for each IPv4 address, or 51.2e27 IPv6
    > addresses per person (meaning one for you and every ant you've ever
    > seen) which should be enough for a few more years. However, you may
    > want to look at RFC1606 "A Historical Perspective On The Usage Of IP
    > Version 9" from 1 April, 1994.
    >
    > Old guy


    OK, thanks for the exhaustive background info

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2