Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Enthusiast Zone > Networking > Wireless networking issues

Wireless networking issues
Thread Tools
abbaZaba
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2008, 09:30 PM
 
I have a mac mini acting as my media center and a macbook. in my apartment, I have a netgear router model WGR614 that I use for wireless. however, my macbook and mac mini are both constantly losing connection.

I am in a college town so pretty much every single apartment has a wireless router. are my machines constantly losing connection because of interference from the other routers?

after doing a quick scan with Kismac, it found 67 routers with the vast majority on channels 1, 6, and 11. I have the netgear set to channel 8. will I be able to alleviate some interference by changing any settings? I have the macbook and mini set to not ask to join other networks.
     
abbaZaba  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2008, 09:43 PM
 
I also have the netgear to NOT broadcast the SSID because I did not want to put any security on the wireless network as we have three windows laptops (two of which run vista) and my macbook and mini.

the netgear has options for WEP and WPA-PSK. I don't want to choose WEP. is WPA-PSK the same as WPA Personal?
     
Cold Warrior
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2008, 09:46 PM
 
What about microwaves? I've seen higher-powered models jam out a wifi signal for as long as they're heating something up.

I'd definitely try another channel. 8 is a good start, like you mentioned. If the netgear has this setting, you could also try lowering your multicast if it's set high.
     
Cold Warrior
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2008, 09:48 PM
 
PSK is pre-shared key, an option in WPA. Not broadcasting the SSID doesn't do anything for security. I suggest moving to channel 8, enabling WPA, and broadcasting the SSID. See how that does with the disconnects.
     
abbaZaba  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2008, 09:50 PM
 
I'd beg to differ about not broadcasting the SSID being a security measure. as far as I know, if they don't know the SSID and it's not broadcasting how are they going to connect?

I'll try that though and see if that helps
     
Cold Warrior
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2008, 10:04 PM
 
A non-broadcast SSID will keep away the neighborhood luddites, but your wifi network still transmits, and that can be picked up by any number of programs that don't respect a non-broadcast SSID.

WPA-PSK (AES, not TKIP, if it gives you the option) is secure, whether the SSID is broadcast or not.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2008, 10:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by abbaZaba View Post
I'd beg to differ about not broadcasting the SSID being a security measure. as far as I know, if they don't know the SSID and it's not broadcasting how are they going to connect?
Obscurity is not a substitute for security. All they have to do is sniff traffic for a minute and they've got the SSID. You can see for yourself how quick and easy the process is with Kismet.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2008, 07:17 AM
 
I was getting frequent disconnects with my Dlink DI-604, but it has been cured since I've upgraded to a Linksys WRT54G2. Transmitting or not transmitting the SSID makes little to no difference. You can try a different channel, but after everything I tried the only solution was to upgrade to a better router.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2008, 10:29 PM
 
The biggest effect I've found from not broadcasting an SSID is difficulty with authorized computers locating the base station/router. It takes mere minutes to find an SSID with software (Windows, Linux, even Mac) that's easy to find online. AirSnort and its cousins do a great job of telling the user what's out there, whether it's broadcasting or not, plus whole lot of other "interesting" information. Without too much difficulty, the old WEP can be broken in a matter of minutes, too. WPA and WPA2 use a different encryption scheme which has not yet been (and may never be) broken.

As mduell says, obscurity is not helpful-ask anyone whose house was burgled because they "hid" a key...

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
abbaZaba  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2008, 10:58 PM
 
well after changing the settings around I'm still experiencing some troubles. when I am VNCing into the mini, my macbook often loses connection. Also, when I am trying to move files over the network it seems painfully slow. I have an airport express which I used last year in my old apartment which was fairly reliable. however, one of my roommates needs a wired connection as he does not have a workstation with a wireless card.

I doubt this is possible but I can't use the airport card to connect to the netgear yet also create an ad-hoc wireless network at the same time?

it seems as if, for the moment, I am stuck with the netgear.
     
abbaZaba  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2008, 11:18 PM
 
what about adding on the Airport Express to the netgear and creating an access point out of the AEx and just use the netgear as a router? AEx = better quality/reliability than cheapo netgear WGR614?
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2008, 11:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
Without too much difficulty, the old WEP can be broken in a matter of minutes, too. WPA and WPA2 use a different encryption scheme which has not yet been (and may never be) broken.
The minutes-long WEP attack rely on weak IVs, which modern firmwares should not be using; AFAIK even the best IV generators only extend the attack time to hours.
WPA is better, but choose your SSID and password wisely; rainbow tables have already been generated/released for the popular SSIDs and passwords.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2008, 11:31 PM
 
I swear, my next WLAN router ( if I ever get one more) is gonna be from Apple (again).

I started out with the original Airport Basestation, and never had any problems with it.

Then went through a whole plethora of other WLAN routers. DLink, Netgear, etc. ALL crap. Every single on of the required a regular reboots, odd connection loses, you name it.
My current router (Netgear Edit: Linksys) is on a timer switch, and every night at 4:00 am, it is power cycled.

So, my one last shot is gonna be an Airport Extreme, then I'm gonna give up on WLAN for my home network.

-t
( Last edited by turtle777; Aug 26, 2008 at 12:01 AM. )
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2008, 11:58 PM
 
Have you tried Linksys? I'm really happy with the result I got from switching to it from D-Link.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2008, 12:00 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
Have you tried Linksys? I'm really happy with the result I got from switching to it from D-Link.
Actually, I have to correct my post above. My current POS router is a Linksys.

I implemented the automatic switch after I got my iPhone. Before that, all my Macs were wired via ethernet. But I wanted my iPhone to use WLAN. So, after a couple of days, I notiiced how WLAN would stop responding. After two weeks, I just got tired yanking the power of the router every other day to force a power cycle in order to fix the connection issues.

-t
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2008, 02:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
I started out with the original Airport Basestation, and never had any problems with it.

Then went through a whole plethora of other WLAN routers. DLink, Netgear, etc. ALL crap. Every single on of the required a regular reboots, odd connection loses, you name it. My current router (Netgear Edit: Linksys) is on a timer switch, and every night at 4:00 am, it is power cycled.
This is absolutely horrible! And unfortunately I have heard similar stories from others with third-party routers, especially the cheaper ones.

In discussions about which router to buy people often mention that Apple routers are more expensive than similar third-party devices. That may well be. But I would sure as hell rather pay double than have to power cycle my router on a regular basis! I have had several AP Extremes and AP Expresses. I have never had to power cycle one of these devices. There is a nasty bug with APU not discovering AP Expresses before setup, but apart from that in my experience Apple's routers have been extremely stable and reliable (wireless reception on OS X is unfortunately another story).
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2008, 11:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
I swear, my next WLAN router ( if I ever get one more) is gonna be from Apple (again).

I started out with the original Airport Basestation, and never had any problems with it.

Then went through a whole plethora of other WLAN routers. DLink, Netgear, etc. ALL crap. Every single on of the required a regular reboots, odd connection loses, you name it.
My current router (Netgear Edit: Linksys) is on a timer switch, and every night at 4:00 am, it is power cycled.

So, my one last shot is gonna be an Airport Extreme, then I'm gonna give up on WLAN for my home network.

-t
Hmmm... I now specifically try to avoid Apple Airports. My graphite 802.11b Airport is a major pain, but luckily I don't use it anymore. When I was using it, I'd have to reboot it every few days.

I do use an Airport Express, but strangely enough I use it via wired. I had it working through wireless but I found it unreliable, so finally I bought some powerline network adapters and use that instead for the network connection to the Airport Express. The only thing I use the Airport Express for is getting music from my iMac's iTunes via the wired network to my stereo. The actual Airport part of it is completely turned off.

Another problem is Apple's braindead Airport Utility software.

BTW, I now have 5 wireless routers in use. However, only one wireless router (2wire) does the routing, and three (Trendnet) act as wireless access points and switches for my wired (powerline) ethernet network. A fourth is an old 802.11b (SMC) unit that I only use as a wired switch. They are rock solid, and way more stable than my Airport base station ever was. Not all are seeing full time use, but the main routing one gets heavy use. One of the other access points/switches gets significant use as well (mainly as a wired switch but with wireless as well), as it's hooked up to my Xbox 360, and I watch movies on it streamed from my iMac's iTunes (over powerline networking). The other two access points/switches see only occasional use.

Mind you, I had to buy a lot of wireless routers to come up with ones I actually found stable. I too have had a plethora of unstable routers. (That old SMC unit can be quite unstable when given a signicant wireless load. However, it works fine as a wired switch.) I think I've owned about a dozen wireless routers now.

P.S. If you cannot run Cat 5e and your home has relatively new electrical wiring, you might want to consider trying powerline networking for your backbone. I use powerline HD hardware from Netgear. It's pretty fast at 30 Mbps to the other end of my house, with "200 Mbps" hardware, but it's a proprietary tech. The HomePlug approved version of 200 Mbps hardware is called HomePlug AV, and has similar real world speeds. More importantly though is its stability and reliability. Even though my wireless router is rock stable, its speed is less reliable, esp. when the receiving computer is physically located at a longer distance from the unit. This issue disappears in my setup with powerline. I then use access points in each zone in my house to provide wireless off that main powerline backbone. Here is my network topology.
( Last edited by Eug; Aug 26, 2008 at 11:32 AM. )
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2008, 11:30 AM
 
Interesting enough, my Graphite Airport had no issues at all. I had to discontinue it because it wouldn't do VPN passthrough. Otherwise, I'd still be using it.

-t
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2008, 11:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Interesting enough, my Graphite Airport had no issues at all. I had to discontinue it because it wouldn't do VPN passthrough. Otherwise, I'd still be using it.
I wonder if the laptops used make a difference. FWIW, my current Mac laptops are 802.11g. However, an even bigger pain is having to use Leopard's Airport Utility to configure it. It doesn't seem to like this thing very much.


Originally Posted by Simon View Post
In discussions about which router to buy people often mention that Apple routers are more expensive than similar third-party devices. That may well be. But I would sure as hell rather pay double than have to power cycle my router on a regular basis! I have had several AP Extremes and AP Expresses. I have never had to power cycle one of these devices.
You're lucky then. As for price, my last (rock solid) Trendnet cost me $19.99 brand new. It is web-configured so I don't have to use that lame Airport Utility software. Meanwhile, my unreliable Airport Express cost me $99.99, but I'm stuck with it, because there is no other device that can easily replace its functionality to stream iTunes music. Luckily it's pretty reliable in wired mode. Just not in wireless mode if you're at any distance.

P.S. My combo 2wire DSL modem/wireless access point/router also cost me $19.99, but that was a refurb. It's on 24/7 serving everything in the house.



There is a nasty bug with APU not discovering AP Expresses before setup
That alone is (almost) a deal killer for me. And as nasty as that bug is, it's sometimes even worse with the graphite 802.11b base station. It was better under Tiger. I guess Apple figures nobody cares about the graphite ABS anymore in Leopard. Fair enough, but it wouldn't be an issue of there was a web configuration page. And it still doesn't explain why APU sucks so bad with the A Express.
( Last edited by Eug; Aug 26, 2008 at 11:53 AM. )
     
abbaZaba  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2008, 03:43 PM
 
I disabled the wireless on the netgear and attached the AEx. it seems to be a lot more stable. I checked the "enable interference robustness" just for shits and giggles. the signal goes up and down but I'm not experiencing any disconnects (so far), VNC seems to not freak out the AEx and moving files over Wifi doesn't cause anything to crap out.

with the AEx in bridge mode, do I have to forward ports on it and the netgear or just forward ports on the router?
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2008, 03:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by abbaZaba View Post
with the AEx in bridge mode, do I have to forward ports on it and the netgear or just forward ports on the router?
Bridge mode means no NAT. So you only have to forward ports on the Netgear.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2008, 03:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
My current router (Netgear Edit: Linksys) is on a timer switch, and every night at 4:00 am, it is power cycled.
Which one? Even my WRT54GC (compact) is more stable and performant than my uncle's various Airports (b graphite, g express, n extreme).
     
Dead Raw Fish
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2008, 11:39 AM
 
In reference to the channel number comments:

"...the vast majority on channels 1, 6, and 11. I have the netgear set to channel 8..." and
"...the vast majority on channels 1, 6, and 11. I have the netgear set to channel 8..."

I can say for a fact this is NOT a good idea. A single channel in 2.4GHz (channels 1-11) will overlap with adjacent channels as the signal is wider than 1 channel. Said differently, channel 1 can be "heard" as far away as channel 5. Channel 6 as low as two and as high as 10...the point being, you are much WORSE off using overlapping channels than trying to co-exisit on the same, non-adjacent channels.

So, what to do about all this traffic on the "common" channels 1, 6 and 11? There are a couple options but not all may be for you.

1) (Best performance, most expensive) Use a different band (5Ghz) - on all the "newer" Mac's with "11n" they are capable of using the 5Ghz band. There are a number of advantages to using this band, not the least of which is that there are very few people using it! Every channel is non-interfering. Also, its not subject to interference from microwave ovens, video blasters, etc. The issue here is that your computers (depending on what card they have in them) may or may not be able to use this band. Even if they do have the right H/W, you will need a new wireless AP setup. Often AP's with 5Ghz capability are more expensive as well.

2) (Free, but lesser performance) Try the "interference robustness" setting on the Macs. This is not a great option in a good network but for really busy "air" it can help. It will limit your topline throughput but *should* keep you connected a bit better. This setting is found in the Airport Menu Extra (that little radar icon on the menu bar). I see that you tried this already so that is good.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2008, 12:00 PM
 
Yes. The only truly independent wireless channels for 802.11g are 1, 6, and 11*. And according to Cisco, you'll actually often get better throughput on wireless networks sharing channel 1 than you will get from networks that have separate channels close together being utilized, like 1 and 4:



Result Summary Showing Average Throughput per Client:

Channels 1,1,6,11 - 601 KB
1,4,8,11 - 349 KB

Hence, for my home network, my 4 wireless access points are on 1, 6, 11, and 1. The two channel 1 access points are at opposite ends of the property (and one of them rarely gets any use) so they don't really interact anyway. But even if they did, a 1,1,6,11 topology is still recommended.

* Well, 2 and 7 are independent too, as are 2 and 9, etc. However, considering most units default to 1, 6, or 11, then you're probably best sticking with one of those three too.
( Last edited by Eug; Aug 27, 2008 at 12:10 PM. )
     
abbaZaba  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2008, 12:21 PM
 
changing to channel 1 has made a noticeable improvement. VNCing doesn't cause disconnects and transferring files doesn't crap out after 13 seconds.

thanks a lot
     
jsyoung82
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 29, 2008, 02:51 PM
 
FWIW, I had frequent drops on my Macbook and MBP while I was not broadcasting my SSID. And this was with an Airport Extreme (Fast Ethernet) router. As soon as I turned the broadcast back on (always secured with WPA2 whether broadcasting SSID or not), my connection became significantly better (but still not good enough, IMO). So I bought a D-Link DIR-655, and I no longer lose connections--period--and my wireless throughput using 802.11n increased almost two-fold. I loved my older Apple routers, but based on recent experience, no more.
( Last edited by jsyoung82; Aug 29, 2008 at 02:53 PM. Reason: Bonus: I can actually access my router wirelessly through IP--Airport Utility barely ever worked!)
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 29, 2008, 03:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by jsyoung82 View Post
FWIW, I had frequent drops on my Macbook and MBP while I was not broadcasting my SSID. And this was with an Airport Extreme (Fast Ethernet) router. As soon as I turned the broadcast back on (always secured with WPA2 whether broadcasting SSID or not), my connection became significantly better (but still not good enough, IMO). So I bought a D-Link DIR-655, and I no longer lose connections--period--and my wireless throughput using 802.11n increased almost two-fold. I loved my older Apple routers, but based on recent experience, no more.
My Airport Express won't work with hidden SSIDs from my Trendnet or 2wire wireless routers. It simply won't negotiate with them, at all, unless unless I broadcast the SSID.

This totally shocked me, because my MacBook, multiple iBooks, iMac, and Cubes all work fine with the very same wireless routers, even with hidden SSIDs. Even my iPhone had no problem.

Apple's wireless hardware implementation isn't very consistent it seems.
     
misterdna
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Venice, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 30, 2008, 11:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
I swear, my next WLAN router ( if I ever get one more) is gonna be from Apple (again).
I felt the same, and had only used Apple Airports for my wireless networks for the past 10 years. However, my opinion changed with the new Airport Extreme, which I purchased about a month ago to finally start using the wireless-N on my MacBook Pro (and the gigabit ethernet). I could not get it to stay connecte for an extended period of time, and it exhibited generally flaky behavior. Upon reading the Apple support boards, found a ton of complaints. Apple gave me a refund for the Airport, and the D-Link I replaced it with works like a charm. Oh, we still use an older Airport Express for Airtunes, and my wife connects to it using her older iBook.
( Last edited by misterdna; Aug 30, 2008 at 11:19 AM. Reason: fix)
     
Cold Warrior
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 30, 2008, 11:36 AM
 
Originally Posted by misterdna View Post
I felt the same, and had only used Apple Airports for my wireless networks for the past 10 years. However, my opinion changed with the new Airport Extreme, which I purchased about a month ago to finally start using the wireless-N on my MacBook Pro (and the gigabit ethernet). I could not get it to stay connecte for an extended period of time, and it exhibited generally flaky behavior. Upon reading the Apple support boards, found a ton of complaints. Apple gave me a refund for the Airport, and the D-Link I replaced it with works like a charm. Oh, we still use an older Airport Express for Airtunes, and my wife connects to it using her older iBook.
That's unfortunate. I bought an Airport Extreme about two months ago and it has been working perfectly. It connects to my cable modem and provides connectivity for an ATV over ethernet, my MBP and MB over n, and (via an Express in bridge mode, g only) an iPod Touch.
     
misterdna
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Venice, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 30, 2008, 01:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cold Warrior View Post
That's unfortunate. I bought an Airport Extreme about two months ago and it has been working perfectly. It connects to my cable modem and provides connectivity for an ATV over ethernet, my MBP and MB over n, and (via an Express in bridge mode, g only) an iPod Touch.
Perhaps there are just some lemons out there? Anyway, glad yours is working well.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 30, 2008, 05:19 PM
 
I think the most recent changes Linksys (Cisco) has made to their line have been to the worse rather than the better. I have both a WAP11 and WAP54G that are real workhorses and have lasted, problem free, for many years. But when they started changing both the processor and OS for the WRT54G, the reported reliability of that formerly "always a safe choice" device, no matter what version after the change, plummeted. I think that's sad. On the other hand, reliability for some of Apple's recent bases has been less than stellar, and with their dependence on the AirPort Utility to manage their routers, it's hard to say which is at fault in this.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
idykenano
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: surrounded by dogs
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 30, 2008, 06:38 PM
 
I'm not sure how much of this has been fixed, but I know from personal experience that wireless handset home phones can interfere with wireless internet. It's rather unfortunate when it does happen.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 30, 2008, 08:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by idykenano View Post
I'm not sure how much of this has been fixed, but I know from personal experience that wireless handset home phones can interfere with wireless internet. It's rather unfortunate when it does happen.
Only 2.4GHz cordless phones; the 5.8GHz and other frequency band phones don't do this. But there are lots of things that can mess up the 2.4GHz signals of your wireless network, like old microwave ovens.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2008, 12:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
But when they started changing both the processor and OS for the WRT54G, the reported reliability of that formerly "always a safe choice" device, no matter what version after the change, plummeted.
FWIW, I love my new WRT54G.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2008, 09:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
FWIW, I love my new WRT54G.
But which hardware version is it? If it's after v5, it's got those "you can't use third party firmware [because somehow letting customers control their usage is bad]" issues. Buying a fresh from the factory Linksys device that has been sitting in a warehouse or on a backroom shelf for quite a while is not at all uncommon, so you may have gotten one of the really good ones. Or, the new version you bought hasn't had any issues that one might want to address with a third party FW. Either way, I congratulate you on having the great functionality you're enjoying.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2008, 11:05 AM
 
I just bought it and assume it's the newest version. It wouldn't really cross my mind to install a third party firmware version, but certainly one can see where a company would want to limit such access. It could turn very easily into a support nightmare if there were a problem with the third party firmware - Linksys would be blamed. I'm just delighted that I have full coverage throughout my house and no more silently dropped connections, as I was plagued with by my D-Link. What features am I missing out on by not having the third party firmware?

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2008, 11:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
But which hardware version is it? If it's after v5, it's got those "you can't use third party firmware [because somehow letting customers control their usage is bad]"
I think the intent of the hardware/software changes with v5 was cost reduction not eliminating customer control. They even released the old hardware/software version as the WRT54GL (maintaining the price of the pre-v5).
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2008, 01:59 PM
 
It's possible that the sole intent was to make the device less expensive to manufacture, but they can't have been ignorant of the enormous third-party firmware community that their original soiree into embedded Linux generated, so they balanced cheap against customer flexibility and cheap won. Note that I didn't say "inexpensive." That might have been the case if their choices had led to similar or fewer problems, but from what I've seen their track record got worse.

I know it's just me being grumpy about the whole thing, but I think Cisco has never thought of the home office consumer the same way they consider corporate customers and their needs, so I have considered their purchase of Linksys as a bad thing.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
dimmer
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2008, 01:32 AM
 
Going back a few posts, by not broadcasting a SSID you do have claim that someone using your wireless network for nefarious purposes is Not Your Problem: you took steps to avoid such use, which is a kinda Get Out Of Jail Free card.

In that sense, you do have some security benefit.
     
Cold Warrior
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2008, 07:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by dimmer View Post
Going back a few posts, by not broadcasting a SSID you do have claim that someone using your wireless network for nefarious purposes is Not Your Problem: you took steps to avoid such use, which is a kinda Get Out Of Jail Free card.

In that sense, you do have some security benefit.
I wouldn't trust the authorities or a jury to make that distinction.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 9, 2008, 08:04 PM
 
If you know enough to turn off SSID broadcast, you'll likely be cast as an "expert," at least in the eyes of "your peers" on the jury (who don't know an SSID from a hole in the ground). No "get out of jail free" there.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
dimmer
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2008, 02:27 AM
 
I wouldn't trust the authorities or a jury to make that distinction.

Maybe not, but I'd trust my lawyer to make sure they did. Compare it to someone who has their car stolen and used to ram raid a store -- the victim is not responsible.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2008, 09:20 AM
 
If you think anything is a getoutofjailfree card then you might be in for a surprise.
     
abbaZaba  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2008, 01:00 PM
 
for what it's worth, the "wireless defense" has been used in europe.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2008, 09:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by abbaZaba View Post
for what it's worth, the "wireless defense" has been used in europe.
European court precedents have little impact on U.S. court decisions. Typically it's due to a different in-built structure for U.S. versus various European courts (The People and the defendant are inherently thought to have an equal credibility (until one or the other blows that, of course) in U.S. courts, something that isn't necessarily true in Europe).

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2008, 01:10 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
The People and the defendant are inherently thought to have an equal credibility (until one or the other blows that, of course) in U.S. courts, something that isn't necessarily true in Europe.
It isn't? Curious to hear more.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2008, 01:24 PM
 
No time to do much research, but when Italian courts use judges to both investigate and prosecute cases, that makes me feel that there is an inherent bias toward the prosecution there. I've heard other, similar stories about French, German and Belgian courts that make me very uncomfortable too.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
abbaZaba  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2008, 01:33 PM
 
so if there is an inherent bias towards prosecution then the fact that the wireless defense has been used successfully would lead me to believe that it has merit.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2008, 09:50 PM
 
Eh. Either way, it's someone else using YOUR stuff without your permission. That part is what bugs me more than any other part. It's rude and arrogant. I HONESTLY DO let neighbors know if their networks are visible and unprotected. I'd like to get that same sort of consideration, but that's not terribly realistic. So to be sure, I protect my network thoroughly (which takes so little effort that it's silly) and thus it's not an issue.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
dimmer
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2008, 11:13 PM
 
Not very social of you Glenn! It's a matter of philosophy I guess: I either hate other people for using my "stuff", or I consider our society to be, well, a society where we work together, support each other as we can, and allow people who have a need for quick access to an access point to make use of the infrastructure. You do your thing, I'll do mine, neither is perfect nor better than the other.

Peace.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:33 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,