Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything... - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything... - Ubuntu ; Moog wrote: > Cork Soaker illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing: > >> >> Hi Moog, thanks again for your help. >> This makes no difference. eth0 and wlan0 both want to be DHCP. That's >> why >> both are set to ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 43

Thread: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

  1. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

    Moog wrote:

    > Cork Soaker illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >
    >>
    >> Hi Moog, thanks again for your help.
    >> This makes no difference. eth0 and wlan0 both want to be DHCP. That's
    >> why
    >> both are set to auto. I need eth0 to use the network, seen as wlan0 is
    >> not working.
    >>
    >> I've tried wlan0 connected on it's own, on both static and using DHCP.
    >> The problem is that the initial connection isn't being made to the router
    >> (OSI Level 1), so no IP configuration is taking place.

    >
    > OK. In which case, you've probably got some godawful chipset in the
    > card.
    >
    > Looks like ndiswrapper is the way forward then.
    >
    > I've recently had a similar spec Belkin USB Wireless card working with
    > the windows driver using it.
    > https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Wi...er/Ndiswrapper
    >


    Tried that, no hope. It's a fairly standard card. The Netgear WG511.
    Getting on a bit in computing terms I reckon.

    I'm updating to Hardy Beta see if that solves it, as I'm out of ideas, and
    it needs to work.

  2. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

    Cork Soaker wrote in
    news:fte13v$tnl$6@registered.motzarella.org:

    Did you ever say if this is version v1 or v2 of that card ?

    http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...king-41/wg511-
    is-a-good-card-with-a-linux-driver-from-prism54-225965/


  3. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

    DanS wrote:
    > Cork Soaker wrote in
    > news:fte13v$tnl$6@registered.motzarella.org:
    >
    > Did you ever say if this is version v1 or v2 of that card ?
    >
    > http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...king-41/wg511-
    > is-a-good-card-with-a-linux-driver-from-prism54-225965/
    >


    Ah well, yes. I can't remember and it doesn't say on the card because
    it's rebranded

    I think it's v1.

  4. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

    On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:15:55 -0600, Daniel Willard
    wrote:

    >Cork Soaker wrote:
    >>> Post the output of
    >>>
    >>> $ cat /etc/network/interfaces
    >>>

    >>
    >> # This file describes the network interfaces available on your system
    >> # and how to activate them. For more information, see interfaces(5).
    >>
    >> # The loopback network interface
    >> auto lo
    >> iface lo inet loopback
    >>
    >> # The primary network interface
    >> auto eth0
    >> #iface eth0 inet dhcp
    >>
    >> iface wlan0 inet dhcp
    >> address 192.168.0.16
    >> netmask 255.255.255.192
    >> gateway 192.168.0.2
    >> wpa-psk BLAH
    >> wpa-driver wext
    >> wpa-key-mgmt WPA-PSK
    >> wpa-proto WPA2
    >> wpa-ssid BLAH
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> auto wlan0
    >>
    >> iface eth0 inet dhcp
    >>

    >
    >0001 0000
    >1100 0000 AND
    >
    >gives what result?
    >
    >Daniel


    OK. 16 AND 192 = 0 but then so does 16 AND 0. I am assuming you are
    referring to Moog's comment and since I know **** about network
    addressing could you please explain the significance of your question.
    It takes very little to confuse me. )

    Thanks

    Roy Strachan - Registered Linux User 469226

  5. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

    On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 22:46:18 GMT, Roy Strachan wrote:

    >On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:15:55 -0600, Daniel Willard
    >wrote:
    >


    >>
    >>0001 0000
    >>1100 0000 AND
    >>
    >>gives what result?
    >>
    >>Daniel

    >
    >OK. 16 AND 192 = 0 but then so does 16 AND 0. I am assuming you are
    >referring to Moog's comment and since I know **** about network
    >addressing could you please explain the significance of your question.
    >It takes very little to confuse me. )
    >
    > Thanks
    >

    Or are you saying the netmask should be 255.255.255.255 ?
    Still confused...
    Roy Strachan - Registered Linux User 469226

  6. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

    "Cork Soaker" wrote in message

    :I have a Netgear WG511 re-branded 802.11g w/ WPA2 PCMCIA wireless adapter.
    : It works find under Windoze but I don't want Windoze - simple.
    :
    : It's plugged in and Ubuntu detects it fine, all seems to be good.
    :
    : It won't connect to my router though.
    : The router Syslog shows whenever a client attempts to connect or
    disconnect,
    : but the Syslog shows nothing.
    :
    : Wireshark running on the client shows IEEE 802 Probe Requests being sent
    out
    : over Broadcast, but the only response from the router seems to be an IEEE
    : 802 Disassociate with reason code 0x0001 (Unspecified reason).
    :
    : I'm afraid I don't have much more information than this, as nothing is
    : providing me with any detail. :-(
    :
    : Any ideas? TIA.
    :
    :



    I've upgraded to Hardy Beta, which is fairly nice I must say.

    I have tried both with and without ndiswrapper, and the only thing that has
    actually changed is that there is no longer a Disassociate response from the
    router at any point.
    Not that I was anywhere anyway, but it seems I've taken a step back.



  7. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

    Roy Strachan wrote:
    > On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 22:46:18 GMT, Roy Strachan wrote:
    >
    >> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:15:55 -0600, Daniel Willard
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> 0001 0000
    >>> 1100 0000 AND
    >>>
    >>> gives what result?
    >>>
    >>> Daniel
    >>>

    >> OK. 16 AND 192 = 0 but then so does 16 AND 0. I am assuming you are
    >> referring to Moog's comment and since I know **** about network
    >> addressing could you please explain the significance of your question.
    >> It takes very little to confuse me. )
    >>
    >> Thanks
    >>

    > Or are you saying the netmask should be 255.255.255.255 ?
    > Still confused...
    >



    255.255.255.0

    You want the netmask to force a match on the first three digits so it
    matches your network and not somebody else's.

    You want the last digit to match any client on the network.

    255 = 1111 1111 = everything must match.

    0 = 0000 0000 = everything can fall through.


    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, Intel, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  8. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

    On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 00:08:02 GMT, "John F. Morse"
    wrote:

    >Roy Strachan wrote:
    >> On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 22:46:18 GMT, Roy Strachan wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:15:55 -0600, Daniel Willard
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> 0001 0000
    >>>> 1100 0000 AND
    >>>>
    >>>> gives what result?
    >>>>
    >>>> Daniel
    >>>>
    >>> OK. 16 AND 192 = 0 but then so does 16 AND 0. I am assuming you are
    >>> referring to Moog's comment and since I know **** about network
    >>> addressing could you please explain the significance of your question.
    >>> It takes very little to confuse me. )
    >>>
    >>> Thanks
    >>>

    >> Or are you saying the netmask should be 255.255.255.255 ?
    >> Still confused...
    >>

    >
    >
    >255.255.255.0
    >
    >You want the netmask to force a match on the first three digits so it
    >matches your network and not somebody else's.
    >
    >You want the last digit to match any client on the network.
    >
    >255 = 1111 1111 = everything must match.
    >
    > 0 = 0000 0000 = everything can fall through.


    OK. That makes sense, Thanks.

    Roy Strachan - Registered Linux User 469226

  9. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

    Cork Soaker wrote in
    news:fte32p$avf$1@registered.motzarella.org:

    > DanS wrote:
    >> Cork Soaker wrote in
    >> news:fte13v$tnl$6@registered.motzarella.org:
    >>
    >> Did you ever say if this is version v1 or v2 of that card ?
    >>
    >> http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...etworking-41/w
    >> g511- is-a-good-card-with-a-linux-driver-from-prism54-225965/
    >>

    >
    > Ah well, yes. I can't remember and it doesn't say on the card because
    > it's rebranded
    >
    > I think it's v1.


    It may be re-branded, but that only means stickers.....

    Identification:

    http://daemonizer.de/prism54/wg511/

  10. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...


    : > I think it's v1.
    :
    : It may be re-branded, but that only means stickers.....
    :
    : Identification:
    :
    : http://daemonizer.de/prism54/wg511/

    Given it's shape alone, it looks like a v2.



  11. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...


    "Cork Soaker" wrote in message
    news:fteavt$idj$1@registered.motzarella.org...
    : "Cork Soaker" wrote in message
    :
    ::I have a Netgear WG511 re-branded 802.11g w/ WPA2 PCMCIA wireless adapter.
    :: It works find under Windoze but I don't want Windoze - simple.
    ::
    :: It's plugged in and Ubuntu detects it fine, all seems to be good.
    ::
    :: It won't connect to my router though.
    :: The router Syslog shows whenever a client attempts to connect or
    : disconnect,
    :: but the Syslog shows nothing.
    ::
    :: Wireshark running on the client shows IEEE 802 Probe Requests being sent
    : out
    :: over Broadcast, but the only response from the router seems to be an IEEE
    :: 802 Disassociate with reason code 0x0001 (Unspecified reason).
    ::
    :: I'm afraid I don't have much more information than this, as nothing is
    :: providing me with any detail. :-(
    ::
    :: Any ideas? TIA.
    ::
    ::
    :
    :
    :
    : I've upgraded to Hardy Beta, which is fairly nice I must say.
    :
    : I have tried both with and without ndiswrapper, and the only thing that
    has
    : actually changed is that there is no longer a Disassociate response from
    the
    : router at any point.
    : Not that I was anywhere anyway, but it seems I've taken a step back.
    :
    :

    Although out of date, I have tried both this:
    http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=185929
    and this:
    http://www.linuxquestions.org/linux/..._06_LTS_Dapper
    without any success.

    I suppose I should now reverse the damage done so I do not lose track!
    And I'm going to bed, I'm tired of this crap.



  12. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

    Cork Soaker illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    > Moog wrote:
    >
    >> Cork Soaker illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Hi Moog, thanks again for your help.
    >>> This makes no difference. eth0 and wlan0 both want to be DHCP. That's
    >>> why
    >>> both are set to auto. I need eth0 to use the network, seen as wlan0 is
    >>> not working.
    >>>
    >>> I've tried wlan0 connected on it's own, on both static and using DHCP.
    >>> The problem is that the initial connection isn't being made to the router
    >>> (OSI Level 1), so no IP configuration is taking place.

    >>
    >> OK. In which case, you've probably got some godawful chipset in the
    >> card.
    >>
    >> Looks like ndiswrapper is the way forward then.
    >>
    >> I've recently had a similar spec Belkin USB Wireless card working with
    >> the windows driver using it.
    >> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Wi...er/Ndiswrapper
    >>

    >
    > Tried that, no hope. It's a fairly standard card. The Netgear WG511.
    > Getting on a bit in computing terms I reckon.


    Interesting. That is quite an old card. I've got one knocking around
    in a draw somewhere.

    > I'm updating to Hardy Beta see if that solves it, as I'm out of ideas, and
    > it needs to work.


    I doubt it will mate. If there isn't support for an older card in
    Gutsy, I doubt it will be added to Hardy.

    It may be bullet biting time. Get a fresh "known to work" card. I know
    there's a small cost to that, but it will probably save your sanity.

    --
    Moog

    "If this is gonna be that kinda party I'm gonna stick my dick in the
    mashed potatoes"

  13. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...



    "John F. Morse" wrote in message
    news:CHyKj.78789$D_3.71156@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
    > Roy Strachan wrote:
    >> On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 22:46:18 GMT, Roy Strachan wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:15:55 -0600, Daniel Willard
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> 0001 0000
    >>>> 1100 0000 AND
    >>>>
    >>>> gives what result?
    >>>>
    >>>> Daniel
    >>>>
    >>> OK. 16 AND 192 = 0 but then so does 16 AND 0. I am assuming you are
    >>> referring to Moog's comment and since I know **** about network
    >>> addressing could you please explain the significance of your question.
    >>> It takes very little to confuse me. )
    >>>
    >>> Thanks
    >>>

    >> Or are you saying the netmask should be 255.255.255.255 ?
    >> Still confused...
    >>

    >
    >
    > 255.255.255.0
    >
    > You want the netmask to force a match on the first three digits so it
    > matches your network and not somebody else's.
    >
    > You want the last digit to match any client on the network.
    >
    > 255 = 1111 1111 = everything must match.
    >
    > 0 = 0000 0000 = everything can fall through.


    There is nothing wrong with a netmask of 255.255.255.192.

    It is FF.FF.FF.C0 so the bottom six bits form the address.

    Valid networks would include 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.0.63 (and three others
    assuming no subnetting).

    HTH.


  14. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...



    :
    : It may be bullet biting time. Get a fresh "known to work" card. I know
    : there's a small cost to that, but it will probably save your sanity.
    :

    True, or back to Windows XP :-/

    Ubuntu obviously runs a lot better, but I don't do a *lot* of work on the
    laptop anyway, I just wanted it to run a bit better. XP is probably the
    unfortunate way to go.



  15. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...


    :
    : There is nothing wrong with a netmask of 255.255.255.192.
    :
    : It is FF.FF.FF.C0 so the bottom six bits form the address.
    :
    : Valid networks would include 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.0.63 (and three others
    : assuming no subnetting).
    :
    :

    I don't know if you're just playing with binaries and hex or trying to make
    a point.

    192.168.0.0/26 is, of course, a valid subnet, and the one I use. Nodes on
    the network are numbered from .01 to .62 (broadcast on .63), as stated
    above.
    It's all do with VPNs, and a /24 subnet is just a waste of IPs. :-D



  16. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

    Cork Soaker wrote:
    > :
    > : There is nothing wrong with a netmask of 255.255.255.192.
    > :
    > : It is FF.FF.FF.C0 so the bottom six bits form the address.
    > :
    > : Valid networks would include 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.0.63 (and three others
    > : assuming no subnetting).
    > :
    > :
    >
    > I don't know if you're just playing with binaries and hex or trying to make
    > a point.
    >
    > 192.168.0.0/26 is, of course, a valid subnet, and the one I use. Nodes on
    > the network are numbered from .01 to .62 (broadcast on .63), as stated
    > above.
    > It's all do with VPNs, and a /24 subnet is just a waste of IPs. :-D



    A "waste" of IPs?

    Care to elaborate?


    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, Intel, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  17. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...


    :
    : A "waste" of IPs?
    :
    : Care to elaborate?
    :
    :

    No.



  18. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...


    "Cork Soaker" wrote in message
    news:fteonl$6uk$1@registered.motzarella.org...
    :
    : "Cork Soaker" wrote in message
    : news:fteavt$idj$1@registered.motzarella.org...
    :: "Cork Soaker" wrote in message
    ::
    :::I have a Netgear WG511 re-branded 802.11g w/ WPA2 PCMCIA wireless
    adapter.
    ::: It works find under Windoze but I don't want Windoze - simple.
    :::
    ::: It's plugged in and Ubuntu detects it fine, all seems to be good.
    :::
    ::: It won't connect to my router though.
    ::: The router Syslog shows whenever a client attempts to connect or
    :: disconnect,
    ::: but the Syslog shows nothing.
    :::
    ::: Wireshark running on the client shows IEEE 802 Probe Requests being sent
    :: out
    ::: over Broadcast, but the only response from the router seems to be an
    IEEE
    ::: 802 Disassociate with reason code 0x0001 (Unspecified reason).
    :::
    ::: I'm afraid I don't have much more information than this, as nothing is
    ::: providing me with any detail. :-(
    :::
    ::: Any ideas? TIA.
    :::
    :::
    ::
    ::
    ::
    :: I've upgraded to Hardy Beta, which is fairly nice I must say.
    ::
    :: I have tried both with and without ndiswrapper, and the only thing that
    : has
    :: actually changed is that there is no longer a Disassociate response from
    : the
    :: router at any point.
    :: Not that I was anywhere anyway, but it seems I've taken a step back.
    ::
    ::
    :
    : Although out of date, I have tried both this:
    : http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=185929
    : and this:
    :
    http://www.linuxquestions.org/linux/..._06_LTS_Dapper
    : without any success.
    :
    : I suppose I should now reverse the damage done so I do not lose track!
    : And I'm going to bed, I'm tired of this crap.
    :


    Well, it's totally buggered now.

    I tried reversing all the crap I've done to poor Hardy, seen as it won't now
    boot if the wireless card is in it's slot, but it's dead now.

    Removed ndiswrapper completely, and tried adding the .inf file again. This,
    for reasons completely unknown, has caused my scroll lock and caps lock
    lights to start blinking - a brand new one on me.
    Google tells me this is the Linux for, "I have crashed." Nice.

    Amusingly, I WAS going to restore to XP from the Ghost image I made of the
    drive before installing Ubuntu, but the recovery disc for Ghost 14 requires
    512MB of RAM just to boot some form of Windows - the laptop has 256MB.
    Idiotic! A call for using linux if ever I saw one! Symantec, what the fsck
    are you doing???

    I can't install XP again as it doesn't netboot (I don't think) and I've
    misplaced the DVD drive for laptop. I'll see if it will work with
    Ignoramus' script.

    I now have a pretty useless laptop; joy.



  19. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

    On 2008-04-08, Cork Soaker wrote:
    >
    > Well, it's totally buggered now.
    >
    > I tried reversing all the crap I've done to poor Hardy, seen as it won't now
    > boot if the wireless card is in it's slot, but it's dead now.
    >
    > Removed ndiswrapper completely, and tried adding the .inf file again. This,
    > for reasons completely unknown, has caused my scroll lock and caps lock
    > lights to start blinking - a brand new one on me.
    > Google tells me this is the Linux for, "I have crashed." Nice.
    >
    > Amusingly, I WAS going to restore to XP from the Ghost image I made of the
    > drive before installing Ubuntu, but the recovery disc for Ghost 14 requires
    > 512MB of RAM just to boot some form of Windows - the laptop has 256MB.
    > Idiotic! A call for using linux if ever I saw one! Symantec, what the fsck
    > are you doing???
    >
    > I can't install XP again as it doesn't netboot (I don't think) and I've
    > misplaced the DVD drive for laptop. I'll see if it will work with
    > Ignoramus' script.
    >
    > I now have a pretty useless laptop; joy.
    >
    >


    If I can help in any way, let me know. Try not to do too many
    complicated things at once. Reinstall ubuntu to make the laptop to
    work with wired network.

    i

  20. Re: Wireless LAN doesn't do much of anything...

    Cork Soaker illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
    >
    >
    >:
    >: It may be bullet biting time. Get a fresh "known to work" card. I know
    >: there's a small cost to that, but it will probably save your sanity.
    >:
    >
    > True, or back to Windows XP :-/
    >
    > Ubuntu obviously runs a lot better, but I don't do a *lot* of work on the
    > laptop anyway, I just wanted it to run a bit better. XP is probably the
    > unfortunate way to go.


    It seems like a number of other users have suffered similar issues
    with people using ndiswrapper on the "made in china" version of your
    card.

    The others use a prism54 chipset.

    There's a company over in the UK that recomend the edimax pcmcia
    wireless card and sell it for £20

    You could try and pick one up on ebay. A fiver maybe?

    I know I'd rather spend a fiver than piss around re-installing xp for 6-8
    hours.

    --
    Moog

    "If this is gonna be that kinda party I'm gonna stick my dick in the
    mashed potatoes"

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast