FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-30-2011, 06:49 PM
mike cloaked
 
Default Dual wireless access points and connection from f14?

I have a question for any wireless expert who can help.

At home I have two wireless access points - one upstairs and one
downstairs - to give a good signal anywhere in the house.

What I would like is to have a seamless wireless access from any
laptop whether mine or a visitor with the appropriate encryption
password.

Now my thinking is that using the *same* ssid and encryption protocol
and password for both APs should do the trick nicely - so that is how
I have things set up (with different channel for each AP's output) and
indeed if I power up a laptop running F14 upstairs it connects nicely
with a lovely strong signal - but if I then go downstairs and boot the
same machine then it tries to connect to the upstairs AP despite the
nearest signal about 10 feet away being a great deal stronger! So
the system tries to connect to the last AP it connected to even if a
local signal is stronger - this is illogical behaviour and it is not
clear if NetworkManager or wpa_supplicant is the culprit - or if I am
not supposed to expect things to work that way!

I had a visitor who had a laptop here this weekend - and the same
problem arose - I decided to try to set up two connections in
NetworkManager both with the same ssid and encryption/password but tag
them with the MAC address of each AP - the box steadfastly refused to
reconnect to the nearest (and strongest) AP after having been
connected to the weak one first, and I had to remove the definition
for the weak signal altogether in NM's list of connections, and only
leave the connection tagged with the MAC address of the nearest strong
signal before restarting the NetworkManager service before I could
persuade NM to connect to the near and strong AP!

I don't know if the design of NetworkManager ever considered this
scenario and whether any developer ever put in place code to hook up
to a valid strong signal even if a previously valid signal (which is
currently weaker) still exists - but it seems to me that the decision
logic in NetworkManager is both perverse and flawed?

Anyone help with some knowledge here?

Thanks

--
mike c
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 01-30-2011, 07:10 PM
Joe Zeff
 
Default Dual wireless access points and connection from f14?

On 01/30/2011 11:49 AM, mike cloaked wrote:
> I don't know if the design of NetworkManager ever considered this
> scenario and whether any developer ever put in place code to hook up
> to a valid strong signal even if a previously valid signal (which is
> currently weaker) still exists - but it seems to me that the decision
> logic in NetworkManager is both perverse and flawed?

I'm guessing that it's never occurred to the devs that somebody might
set things up like that. You might want to put this on Bugzilla as a
feature request because I doubt that most people would consider it to be
a bug.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 01-30-2011, 07:16 PM
Genes MailLists
 
Default Dual wireless access points and connection from f14?

On 01/30/2011 03:10 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 01/30/2011 11:49 AM, mike cloaked wrote:
>> I don't know if the design of NetworkManager ever considered this
>> scenario and whether any developer ever put in place code to hook up
>> to a valid strong signal even if a previously valid signal (which is
>> currently weaker) still exists - but it seems to me that the decision
>> logic in NetworkManager is both perverse and flawed?
>
> I'm guessing that it's never occurred to the devs that somebody might
> set things up like that. You might want to put this on Bugzilla as a
> feature request because I doubt that most people would consider it to be
> a bug.

If behavior is as described then its a bug - that's precisely how ALL
access points are set up for any case where there is more than a single
AP on same SSID .. i.e. every commercial, office, hotel, campus, airport
etc wifi is done exactly that way ... many personal setups use multiple
AP's as well on same SSID - its the correct way to do it.

gene
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 01-30-2011, 07:20 PM
"Wolfgang S. Rupprecht"
 
Default Dual wireless access points and connection from f14?

mike cloaked <mike.cloaked@gmail.com> writes:
> At home I have two wireless access points - one upstairs and one
> downstairs - to give a good signal anywhere in the house.
>
> What I would like is to have a seamless wireless access from any
> laptop whether mine or a visitor with the appropriate encryption
> password.

Even if you get NetworkManager to play ball, it isn't going to be
seemless unless you bridge the wireless AP's and hand out IP addresses
from some other server on your net. Once the IP address changes as you
move from one AP to another, all your connectins will die.

-wolfgang
--
Wolfgang S. Rupprecht http://www.wsrcc.com/wolfgang/ (IPv6-only)
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 01-30-2011, 07:21 PM
Genes MailLists
 
Default Dual wireless access points and connection from f14?

On 01/30/2011 03:16 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
bug.
>
> If behavior is as described then its a bug - that's precisely how ALL
> access points are set up for any case where there is more than a single
> AP on same SSID .. i.e. every commercial, office, hotel, campus, airport
> etc wifi is done exactly that way ... many personal setups use multiple
> AP's as well on same SSID - its the correct way to do it.
>
> gene


Anyone not familiar with wifi roaming may want to google it ... cisco
used to have a guide on this very topic ... it pre-dated 802.11n but the
setup is (essentially) the same .. (N changes channel frequencies which
brings more issues to noodle upon) ..

g/
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 01-30-2011, 07:21 PM
Genes MailLists
 
Default Dual wireless access points and connection from f14?

On 01/30/2011 03:20 PM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote:
>
> mike cloaked <mike.cloaked@gmail.com> writes:
>> At home I have two wireless access points - one upstairs and one
>> downstairs - to give a good signal anywhere in the house.
>>
>> What I would like is to have a seamless wireless access from any
>> laptop whether mine or a visitor with the appropriate encryption
>> password.
>
> Even if you get NetworkManager to play ball, it isn't going to be
> seemless unless you bridge the wireless AP's and hand out IP addresses
> from some other server on your net. Once the IP address changes as you
> move from one AP to another, all your connectins will die.
>
> -wolfgang

The standard roaming setup uses 1 dhcp server .. your ip wont change
when you roam.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 01-30-2011, 07:29 PM
Genes MailLists
 
Default Dual wireless access points and connection from f14?

On 01/30/2011 03:21 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 01/30/2011 03:20 PM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote:
>>


The point of roaming with multiple AP's is to be able to seamlessly
move around without the connections dying ... as far as user is
concerned its a single network - just like when you roam with a cell
phone - you don't care when the connection is handed off to a new cell
tower - you don't care here either - you just start talking to a new AP.

So if indeed something is preventing roaming from working as it was
intended & designed to work - then something is awry somewhere - not
saying its not an AP setup problem - just saying what the OP described
he is expecting to happen, is the norm.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 01-30-2011, 07:42 PM
"Wolfgang S. Rupprecht"
 
Default Dual wireless access points and connection from f14?

Genes MailLists <lists@sapience.com> writes:
> The point of roaming with multiple AP's is to be able to seamlessly
> move around without the connections dying ... as far as user is
> concerned its a single network - just like when you roam with a cell
> phone - you don't care when the connection is handed off to a new cell
> tower - you don't care here either - you just start talking to a new AP.
>
> So if indeed something is preventing roaming from working as it was
> intended & designed to work - then something is awry somewhere - not
> saying its not an AP setup problem - just saying what the OP described
> he is expecting to happen, is the norm.

The OP is clearly up against a NM issue in the selection criteria for
the roaming case. Even if he solves that he won't be home free.

Roaming isn't as simple as setting up two wireless routers with the same
SSID. One needs to strip down one or both of the routers and turn them
into a bridge so that all firwalling and NAT-ing is done consistantly no
matter which wireless box one accesses. Then there is the issue of
running spanning tree or something to prevent all AP's from
retransimtting all packets they hear. Without that each AP pollutes the
airwaves a bit by re-transmitting each packet it recieves. With
overlapping AP coverage that is going to cause quite a bit of
interference.

My advice to the OP would be to get a better AP with a more powerful
radio. Typical consumer junk is 15mW. Without looking too hard one can
get a good 100mW - 300mW init for not much more. (Google: Ubiquiti)

-wolfgang
--
Wolfgang S. Rupprecht http://www.wsrcc.com/wolfgang/ (IPv6-only)
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 01-30-2011, 08:15 PM
Genes MailLists
 
Default Dual wireless access points and connection from f14?

On 01/30/2011 03:42 PM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote:
>
> Genes MailLists <lists@sapience.com> writes:

> My advice to the OP would be to get a better AP with a more powerful
> radio. Typical consumer junk is 15mW. Without looking too hard one can
> get a good 100mW - 300mW init for not much more. (Google: Ubiquiti)
>
> -wolfgang


With respect - please if you really dont know or understand something,
do not post speculation without caveating it speculative opinion - some
reading this may be misled.

Your post is speculative and not correct.

Sorry ...
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 01-31-2011, 12:18 AM
Ed Greshko
 
Default Dual wireless access points and connection from f14?

On 01/31/2011 05:15 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 01/30/2011 03:42 PM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote:
>> My advice to the OP would be to get a better AP with a more powerful
>> radio. Typical consumer junk is 15mW. Without looking too hard one can
>> get a good 100mW - 300mW init for not much more. (Google: Ubiquiti)
>>
>> -wolfgang
>
> With respect - please if you really dont know or understand something,
> do not post speculation without caveating it speculative opinion - some
> reading this may be misled.
>
> Your post is speculative and not correct.
>

I am not sure what aspect of the previous post you find speculation or
in need of a caveat, but....

My Dad lives in 2 story home + basement and is a MS only user (don't
attempt to argue this point). For historical (hysterical?) reasons the
Internet connection is on the 2nd floor. He had a wireless AP and
connectivity on the ground floor was fine....reception in the basement
was weak and subject to frequent disconnects.

We replaced his wireless AP with product (after trying and returning
other products) from Ubiquiti and he is now a happy camper. He even has
connectivity his detached garage.

OK, maybe the caveat would be YMMV but in my Dad's case it would have
resulted in sound advice.

--
It matters not whether you win or lose; what matters is whether II win
or lose. -- Darrin Weinberg 葛斯克 愛德華 / 台北市八德路四段

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:18 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org