Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SSID Broadcasts

Last response: in Wireless Networking
Share
June 14, 2004 9:32:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

I realise this sounds like a stupid question.

But...

Is there any reason why an Access Point would not reliably talk to a
wireless router unless the SSID broadcasts are enabled at one end or the
other?

Nick

More about : ssid broadcasts

Anonymous
June 14, 2004 10:25:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:32:53 +0100, Nick spoketh

>I realise this sounds like a stupid question.
>
>But...
>
>Is there any reason why an Access Point would not reliably talk to a
>wireless router unless the SSID broadcasts are enabled at one end or the
>other?
>
>Nick
>

Since it really doesn't matter if SSIDs are broadcast or not (from a
security standpoint), why not just leave that enabled and go from there.

Also, to connect a WAP to a router, it has to be configured as a bridge,
and since this configuration is vendor specific, you cannot
mix-and-match brand names...


Lars M. Hansen
http://www.hansenonline.net
(replace 'badnews' with 'news' in e-mail address)
June 14, 2004 10:25:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Lars M. Hansen <badnews@hansenonline.net> wrote in
news:ka9sc05nme2q9fkdqpbe0ks9glh2i4a08d@4ax.com:

> On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:32:53 +0100, Nick spoketh
>
>>I realise this sounds like a stupid question.
>>
>>But...
>>
>>Is there any reason why an Access Point would not reliably talk to a
>>wireless router unless the SSID broadcasts are enabled at one end or the
>>other?
>>
>>Nick
>>
>
> Since it really doesn't matter if SSIDs are broadcast or not (from a
> security standpoint), why not just leave that enabled and go from there.
>
> Also, to connect a WAP to a router, it has to be configured as a bridge,
> and since this configuration is vendor specific, you cannot
> mix-and-match brand names...
>

Does it need to be a bridge ? I have a wired-only D-Link rtr 192.168.1.1.
If I added a WAP only (not using the rtr/NAT portion of it), 192.168.1.2,
and have a wireless PC conn at 192.168.1.3, if my gateway is set to
192.168.1.1, wouldn't the WAP just forward to that, just like trying to
access any other local IP ?






> Lars M. Hansen
> http://www.hansenonline.net
> (replace 'badnews' with 'news' in e-mail address)
>
Related resources
June 14, 2004 11:24:20 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

"Nick" <me@privacy.com> wrote in news:2j628rFsve9dU1@uni-berlin.de:

> I realise this sounds like a stupid question.
>
> But...
>
> Is there any reason why an Access Point would not reliably talk to a
> wireless router unless the SSID broadcasts are enabled at one end or the
> other?
>
> Nick
>
>
>

I don't quite follow. Did you mean to say a wireless adapter talking to a
WAP? Unless I'm gravely mistaken, WAPs that are on the market
(802.11a/b/g) cannot talk to each other. Of course, they can be hooked
together via a network cable if they also include an ethernet switch.
--Jago
June 14, 2004 11:36:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

"Nick" <me@privacy.com> wrote in message
news:2j628rFsve9dU1@uni-berlin.de...
> I realise this sounds like a stupid question.
>
> But...
>
> Is there any reason why an Access Point would not reliably talk to a
> wireless router unless the SSID broadcasts are enabled at one end or the
> other?

I was about to say "no", but I just reread your statement that you are
trying to connect a wireless router to an AP. Can you be more specific about
what you're trying to do?

>
> Nick
>
>
Anonymous
June 15, 2004 4:06:04 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

This is untrue. Some brands can mix. I am currently using a Netgear
PC Card (WG511T) to access my Belkin WAP (F5D7230-4) which is in turn,
conected to my Netgear router (WGR614v1).

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 18:25:18 -0400, Lars M. Hansen
<badnews@hansenonline.net> wrote:

><snipped>
>Also, to connect a WAP to a router, it has to be configured as a bridge,
>and since this configuration is vendor specific, you cannot
>mix-and-match brand names...
>
>
>Lars M. Hansen
>http://www.hansenonline.net
>(replace 'badnews' with 'news' in e-mail address)
Anonymous
June 15, 2004 8:16:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

"DS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a..n.e.t> wrote in message
news:Xns9508C44B63EA7idispcom@216.65.98.77...
> Lars M. Hansen <badnews@hansenonline.net> wrote in
> news:ka9sc05nme2q9fkdqpbe0ks9glh2i4a08d@4ax.com:
>
> > On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:32:53 +0100, Nick spoketh
> >
> >>I realise this sounds like a stupid question.
> >>
> >>But...
> >>
> >>Is there any reason why an Access Point would not reliably talk to a
> >>wireless router unless the SSID broadcasts are enabled at one end or the
> >>other?
> >>
> >>Nick
> >>
> >
> > Since it really doesn't matter if SSIDs are broadcast or not (from a
> > security standpoint), why not just leave that enabled and go from there.
> >
> > Also, to connect a WAP to a router, it has to be configured as a bridge,
> > and since this configuration is vendor specific, you cannot
> > mix-and-match brand names...
> >
>
> Does it need to be a bridge ? I have a wired-only D-Link rtr 192.168.1.1.
> If I added a WAP only (not using the rtr/NAT portion of it), 192.168.1.2,
> and have a wireless PC conn at 192.168.1.3, if my gateway is set to
> 192.168.1.1, wouldn't the WAP just forward to that, just like trying to
> access any other local IP ?

You are saying that the AP will bridge the WLAN to the wired LAN. That is
the basic function of an AP. But the OP is trying to have the AP relay (or
repeat) a transmission from a wireless client to the router WIRELESSLY.
That is different. Then the AP is acting as a repeater. Some vendors call
this a bridge, but technically a wireless bridge connects two wired LANs
wirelessly.

Ron Bandes, CCNP, CTT+, etc.
Anonymous
June 15, 2004 8:18:06 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

"Doug Jamal" <unimportantbishiv6atyahoodotcom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aresc0lj6187sfg00t6mnlr78rkgk5p7b5@4ax.com...
> This is untrue. Some brands can mix. I am currently using a Netgear
> PC Card (WG511T) to access my Belkin WAP (F5D7230-4) which is in turn,
> conected to my Netgear router (WGR614v1).
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 18:25:18 -0400, Lars M. Hansen
> <badnews@hansenonline.net> wrote:
>
> ><snipped>
> >Also, to connect a WAP to a router, it has to be configured as a bridge,
> >and since this configuration is vendor specific, you cannot
> >mix-and-match brand names...
> >
> >
> >Lars M. Hansen
> >http://www.hansenonline.net
> >(replace 'badnews' with 'news' in e-mail address)

Doug,

Just to clarify, is the link between your Belkin WAP and your Netgear router
wireless?

Ron Bandes, CCNP, CTT+, etc.
June 15, 2004 9:35:04 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

"Ron Bandes" <RunderscoreBandes @yah00.com> wrote in
news:FKuzc.1567$m83.347080@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net:

>
> "DS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a..n.e.t> wrote in message
> news:Xns9508C44B63EA7idispcom@216.65.98.77...
>> Lars M. Hansen <badnews@hansenonline.net> wrote in
>> news:ka9sc05nme2q9fkdqpbe0ks9glh2i4a08d@4ax.com:
>>
>> > On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:32:53 +0100, Nick spoketh
>> >
>> >>I realise this sounds like a stupid question.
>> >>
>> >>But...
>> >>
>> >>Is there any reason why an Access Point would not reliably talk to
>> >>a wireless router unless the SSID broadcasts are enabled at one end
>> >>or the other?
>> >>
>> >>Nick
>> >>
>> >
>> > Since it really doesn't matter if SSIDs are broadcast or not (from
>> > a security standpoint), why not just leave that enabled and go from
>> > there.
>> >
>> > Also, to connect a WAP to a router, it has to be configured as a
>> > bridge, and since this configuration is vendor specific, you cannot
>> > mix-and-match brand names...
>> >
>>
>> Does it need to be a bridge ? I have a wired-only D-Link rtr
>> 192.168.1.1. If I added a WAP only (not using the rtr/NAT portion of
>> it), 192.168.1.2, and have a wireless PC conn at 192.168.1.3, if my
>> gateway is set to 192.168.1.1, wouldn't the WAP just forward to that,
>> just like trying to access any other local IP ?
>
> You are saying that the AP will bridge the WLAN to the wired LAN.
> That is the basic function of an AP. But the OP is trying to have the
> AP relay (or repeat) a transmission from a wireless client to the
> router WIRELESSLY. That is different. Then the AP is acting as a
> repeater. Some vendors call this a bridge, but technically a wireless
> bridge connects two wired LANs wirelessly.
>
> Ron Bandes, CCNP, CTT+, etc.
>
>

After re-reading the question, at first I thought it wasn't clear what
the OP was trying to do. But then I noticed it said 'any reason why an
Access Point would not reliably talk to a wireless router' which would
lead me to believe that it works some of the time. So, it's still not
clear, to me anyway, what's going on.
June 15, 2004 5:11:12 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Yes it works but slowly. The AP is at the limit of coverage of the router
and tracert was showing slow or no reponses from routers.

Enabling SSID broadcasts on both the AP and the router improved the
performance and throughput significantly.

This makes absolutely no sense to me, but I wondered if these devices use
SSID broadcasts to somehow keep alive or re establish dropped wireless layer
2 sessions.

Nick


"DS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a..n.e.t> wrote in message
news:Xns95094344CB652idispcom@216.65.98.77...
> "Ron Bandes" <RunderscoreBandes @yah00.com> wrote in
> news:FKuzc.1567$m83.347080@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net:
>
> >
> > "DS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a..n.e.t> wrote in message
> > news:Xns9508C44B63EA7idispcom@216.65.98.77...
> >> Lars M. Hansen <badnews@hansenonline.net> wrote in
> >> news:ka9sc05nme2q9fkdqpbe0ks9glh2i4a08d@4ax.com:
> >>
> >> > On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:32:53 +0100, Nick spoketh
> >> >
> >> >>I realise this sounds like a stupid question.
> >> >>
> >> >>But...
> >> >>
> >> >>Is there any reason why an Access Point would not reliably talk to
> >> >>a wireless router unless the SSID broadcasts are enabled at one end
> >> >>or the other?
> >> >>
> >> >>Nick
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Since it really doesn't matter if SSIDs are broadcast or not (from
> >> > a security standpoint), why not just leave that enabled and go from
> >> > there.
> >> >
> >> > Also, to connect a WAP to a router, it has to be configured as a
> >> > bridge, and since this configuration is vendor specific, you cannot
> >> > mix-and-match brand names...
> >> >
> >>
> >> Does it need to be a bridge ? I have a wired-only D-Link rtr
> >> 192.168.1.1. If I added a WAP only (not using the rtr/NAT portion of
> >> it), 192.168.1.2, and have a wireless PC conn at 192.168.1.3, if my
> >> gateway is set to 192.168.1.1, wouldn't the WAP just forward to that,
> >> just like trying to access any other local IP ?
> >
> > You are saying that the AP will bridge the WLAN to the wired LAN.
> > That is the basic function of an AP. But the OP is trying to have the
> > AP relay (or repeat) a transmission from a wireless client to the
> > router WIRELESSLY. That is different. Then the AP is acting as a
> > repeater. Some vendors call this a bridge, but technically a wireless
> > bridge connects two wired LANs wirelessly.
> >
> > Ron Bandes, CCNP, CTT+, etc.
> >
> >
>
> After re-reading the question, at first I thought it wasn't clear what
> the OP was trying to do. But then I noticed it said 'any reason why an
> Access Point would not reliably talk to a wireless router' which would
> lead me to believe that it works some of the time. So, it's still not
> clear, to me anyway, what's going on.
>
>
!