On Dec 7, 2003, at 2:59 PM, Chuck Cole wrote: > Where are we now? > > So.. does your report say that: > 1) Dunn 3rd St that uses PC Speed WISP is unchanged and probably still > has a show > stopping problems with some 802.11g client products (eg, Apple & > Linksys), > but has no known problem with 802.11b client products. I was unaware that they used a different WISP than the other Dunn Bros locations. I suppose I should drive by there this morning and test it. > 2) The Dunn site on Como that use SurfThing WISP also has show > stopping problems with > Apple 802.11g client products and maybe other g's. It had a show stopping problem last week when I tested. Not sure right now as I haven't been back. The issues as far as I could tell were not related to the wireless access point. I could obtain an IP address, ping other hosts on the local subnet, and do pretty much anything else that one would expect me to do if I was connected to a network. > 3) Apple's 802.11g products work in 802.11b mode at one or more > SurtfThing 802.11b > sites. Yes, my machine stepped down to the lower speed and worked just fine at another location. I don't know if that site is using a totally different revision of WAP and router compared with other sites. > 4) Most 802.11b WISP sites work fine with 802.11b client products. Most 802.11b sites work just fine with 802.11b and 802.11g clients, period. From my troubleshooting, the problems was not caused by the access point, but by a network router that acted as a gateway between the internet connection and the local network. > 5) You have no clarification for Toni Decker's recent Apple > observation at 3rd St... ie, > this success report is new but not known to be a server vs client end > change, and not > known to be the elusive g-to-g or b connection via Apple g-capable > client. Seeing as they use a totally different company for their WISP than who I assisted last week, it's hard to say what could of been the problem. If the issue was a problem with an 802.11g client connecting to their network, the symptoms would probably be an inability to join the network, or an inability to pass any traffic once assiciated with the network. > I think those are the inclusive summary statements. Status seems to > be that the > problems with g client hardware continue unchanged at sites tested so > far, and no site > (except maybe Spyhouse - below) has 802.11b client problems. The issues with a newer 802.11g using an older 802.11b network in my experience have been very limited. It happens that a certain subset - but not all - wireless sites in the twin cities are having issues, but that is most likely because they have the same faulty firmware revision loaded on a bunch of the same model router. Which is indicative of a software problem, not a massive inability of 802.11g clients to work with a .b network. I'll continue investigating, as time allows. -- Ted Rattei tedr at rattei.org 612-201-2393 _______________________________________________ Twin Cities Wireless Users Group Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota http://www.tcwug.org tcwug-list at tcwug.org https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tcwug-list