wireless problem

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Have a SMC7004wFw router home network with one hardwire and two wireless
units -- were initially running off smc cards. Recently purchased a new
labtop that has its own internal wireless (intel 2200BG). Initially
successfully worked as unsecured hookup -- found connection and worked
well. Then internet ceased to work -- have packets received but not
sent. States that unit is connected and good signal, can hit repair
button and will reconnect -- but internet still not working. Properties
of wireless hookups shows microsoft client, intell wireless connection
agent, File and printer sharing, Q0S packet scheduler, AEGIS protocol
--IEEE 802.1x (v3.1.0.1), and TCP/IP.

If I use the hardwire hookup from new computer -- to same router, works
fine. What is happening? Thanks.
6 answers Last reply
More about wireless problem
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In news:ukYRz5yoFHA.568@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl,
    Dan Conrad <dconrad@hsc.vcu.edu> had this to say:

    My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:

    > Have a SMC7004wFw router home network with one hardwire and two
    > wireless units -- were initially running off smc cards. Recently
    > purchased a new labtop that has its own internal wireless (intel
    > 2200BG). Initially successfully worked as unsecured hookup -- found
    > connection and worked well. Then internet ceased to work -- have
    > packets received but not sent. States that unit is connected and
    > good signal, can hit repair button and will reconnect -- but internet
    > still not working. Properties of wireless hookups shows microsoft
    > client, intell wireless connection agent, File and printer sharing,
    > Q0S packet scheduler, AEGIS protocol --IEEE 802.1x (v3.1.0.1), and
    > TCP/IP.
    > If I use the hardwire hookup from new computer -- to same router,
    > works fine. What is happening? Thanks.

    What IP address is it giving you? Is it assigning one in the 192.168.*.*
    range? Is there a firewall blocking outbound packets?

    Galen
    --

    "Chance has put in our way a most singular and whimsical problem, and
    its solution is its own reward."

    Sherlock Holmes
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Galen wrote:
    > In news:ukYRz5yoFHA.568@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl,
    > Dan Conrad <dconrad@hsc.vcu.edu> had this to say:
    >
    > My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:
    >
    >
    >>Have a SMC7004wFw router home network with one hardwire and two
    >>wireless units -- were initially running off smc cards. Recently
    >>purchased a new labtop that has its own internal wireless (intel
    >>2200BG). Initially successfully worked as unsecured hookup -- found
    >>connection and worked well. Then internet ceased to work -- have
    >>packets received but not sent. States that unit is connected and
    >>good signal, can hit repair button and will reconnect -- but internet
    >>still not working. Properties of wireless hookups shows microsoft
    >>client, intell wireless connection agent, File and printer sharing,
    >>Q0S packet scheduler, AEGIS protocol --IEEE 802.1x (v3.1.0.1), and
    >>TCP/IP.
    >>If I use the hardwire hookup from new computer -- to same router,
    >>works fine. What is happening? Thanks.
    >
    >
    > What IP address is it giving you? Is it assigning one in the 192.168.*.*
    > range? Is there a firewall blocking outbound packets?
    >
    > Galen
    Yes ip address is as you indicate -- how can I tell if a firewall is
    blocking outbound packets?
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Dan Conrad" <dconrad@hsc.vcu.edu> wrote in message
    news:uqCgmPFpFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    >
    > Yes ip address is as you indicate -- how can I tell if a firewall is
    > blocking outbound packets?

    I'm not well versed in networking at all, perhaps this is way off base.
    I've had an ongoing problem with my home network since I switched from a B
    to a G router. Two desktops that are connected via wireless adaptor would
    lose the connection every day. At times, just reconnecting worked but at
    other times, there was "limited" connectivity - the two desktops could see
    the network but could not surf, receive email, etc. I found the problem to
    be a defect in the router. The router supports 64 & 128 WEP and also WPA.
    With no encryption or 64 bit WEP, the two desktops connected with no problem
    and did not lose the connection. With any higher encryption, connectivity
    would be lost at random times and there were times when re-establishing a
    connection would not work.
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    begin  trojan.vbs ... On Friday 19 August 2005 07:05 am, Peter A.
    Stavrakoglou had this to say in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

    > "Dan Conrad" <dconrad@hsc.vcu.edu> wrote in message
    > news:uqCgmPFpFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    >>
    >> Yes ip address is as you indicate -- how can I tell if a firewall is
    >> blocking outbound packets?
    >
    > I'm not well versed in networking at all, perhaps this is way off base.
    > I've had an ongoing problem with my home network since I switched from a B
    > to a G router. Two desktops that are connected via wireless adaptor would
    > lose the connection every day. At times, just reconnecting worked but at
    > other times, there was "limited" connectivity - the two desktops could see
    > the network but could not surf, receive email, etc. I found the problem
    > to
    > be a defect in the router. The router supports 64 & 128 WEP and also WPA.
    > With no encryption or 64 bit WEP, the two desktops connected with no
    > problem
    > and did not lose the connection. With any higher encryption, connectivity
    > would be lost at random times and there were times when re-establishing a
    > connection would not work.

    Unless something more fundamental is amiss, it sounds to be like the lost
    connections are due to signal loss. You need to be keeping an eye on your
    signal strength. If the signal is interrupted at all when encryption
    handshaking is taking place, the connection will fail. Wireless connections
    are constantly going up and down in signal strength due to interference. If
    your signal strength isn't strong to start with the addition of 128bit
    encryption to your tcp packets can cause problems not seen if no encryption
    is used.


    --
    Have you been MicroShafted today?
    To mess up a Linux box, you need to work *at* it.
    To mess up a Windows box, you need to work *on* it.
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "NoStop" <nostop@stopspam.com> wrote in message
    news:ornNe.265579$s54.30163@pd7tw2no...
    > begin trojan.vbs ... On Friday 19 August 2005 07:05 am, Peter A.
    > Stavrakoglou had this to say in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:
    >
    >> "Dan Conrad" <dconrad@hsc.vcu.edu> wrote in message
    >> news:uqCgmPFpFHA.3380@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    >>>
    >>> Yes ip address is as you indicate -- how can I tell if a firewall is
    >>> blocking outbound packets?
    >>
    >> I'm not well versed in networking at all, perhaps this is way off base.
    >> I've had an ongoing problem with my home network since I switched from a
    >> B
    >> to a G router. Two desktops that are connected via wireless adaptor
    >> would
    >> lose the connection every day. At times, just reconnecting worked but at
    >> other times, there was "limited" connectivity - the two desktops could
    >> see
    >> the network but could not surf, receive email, etc. I found the problem
    >> to
    >> be a defect in the router. The router supports 64 & 128 WEP and also
    >> WPA.
    >> With no encryption or 64 bit WEP, the two desktops connected with no
    >> problem
    >> and did not lose the connection. With any higher encryption,
    >> connectivity
    >> would be lost at random times and there were times when re-establishing a
    >> connection would not work.
    >
    > Unless something more fundamental is amiss, it sounds to be like the lost
    > connections are due to signal loss. You need to be keeping an eye on your
    > signal strength. If the signal is interrupted at all when encryption
    > handshaking is taking place, the connection will fail. Wireless
    > connections
    > are constantly going up and down in signal strength due to interference.
    > If
    > your signal strength isn't strong to start with the addition of 128bit
    > encryption to your tcp packets can cause problems not seen if no
    > encryption
    > is used.

    Perhaps that is the the problem with the router - not enough signal
    strength. A new one is one the way. There is also a laptop that has never
    lost the connection and is a further distance from the router than the two
    desktops that lose connections. Also, I have a wireless bridge attached to
    an X-Box on the bottom floor of the house (all PCs are on the top floor) and
    that has never dropped a connection. It's strange, hopefully the
    replacement router will solve the problem otherwise I'll stick with the 64
    bit encryption if necessary.
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    I have seen high gain antenna kits for wireless routers...it might help if
    it is indeed a signal strength problem.

    --
    A Professional Amatuer...If anyone knew it all, none of would be here!

    > Perhaps that is the the problem with the router - not enough signal
    > strength. A new one is one the way. There is also a laptop that has
    > never lost the connection and is a further distance from the router than
    > the two desktops that lose connections. Also, I have a wireless bridge
    > attached to an X-Box on the bottom floor of the house (all PCs are on the
    > top floor) and that has never dropped a connection. It's strange,
    > hopefully the replacement router will solve the problem otherwise I'll
    > stick with the 64 bit encryption if necessary.
Ask a new question

Read More

Wireless Microsoft Windows XP