|
pc
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Linksys Range Extender Question
Is there such a thing as a firmware upgrade for the Linksys Range Extender? If I configure my Range Extender to have a different SSID than the WRT54GS router (which I was told was a good idea), should I also change the channel or does it not matter? Thanks, Patty <pattyja***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Show quoteHide quote news:1109704635.027179.117580@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... For Firmware:> Thanks for some newbie help. > > Is there such a thing as a firmware upgrade for the Linksys Range > Extender? > > > If I configure my Range Extender to have a different SSID than the > WRT54GS router (which I was told was a good idea), should I also change > the channel or does it not matter? > > > Thanks, > Patty Go to the Linksys website and click on support. Select Technical Support, Click on Product Pages, Select Driver.Firmware in the dropdown box, then select your product model. A range extender is a repeater and must be on the same channel as the Router. I see no reason in having 2 separate SSIDs, if you want to roam around the house and stay connected then stick with one SSID, otherwise you will disconnect and reconnect everytime you get in or out of range of one or the other. pattyja***@hotmail.com wrote:
>Thanks for some newbie help. Linksys provides firmware upgrades. I don't know of any 3rd party> >Is there such a thing as a firmware upgrade for the Linksys Range >Extender? firmware. >If I configure my Range Extender to have a different SSID than the The channel must be the same as the AP you wish it to associate>WRT54GS router (which I was told was a good idea), should I also change >the channel or does it not matter? with. The AP association is specified by the channel, the MAC of the AP, and the WEP key. The WRE54G ignores the SSID it is configured with, and will automatically change to use the SSID of the AP. -- Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) fl***@barrow.com Thank you . I figures out there was a Linksys firmware upgrade and how
to do it. Duh. Dumb me. Linksys told me to use a different SSID I think because they felt you might pick up the weaker signal by accident. But you are right if you start roaming around your house, you would have to reconnect. Duh....Not my day for thinking. Thanks Patty pattyja***@hotmail.com wrote:
>Thank you . I figures out there was a Linksys firmware upgrade and how They don't make it exactly obvious though! Of course there are>to do it. Duh. Dumb me. so few configuration options available that when I did it I just clicked on the one and only thing I hadn't tried, and there it was... :-) >Linksys told me to use a different SSID I think because they felt you I'm not sure what the previous firmware load did, but itcertainly makes no difference, with the latest firmware, what you enter for the SSID. >might pick up the weaker signal by accident. But you are right if you Well, the other side of that is the situation where you have a>start roaming around your house, you would have to reconnect. >Duh....Not my day for thinking. permanently located client which just happens to be in a fringe area for both the AP and the repeater. Using the same SSID you cannot select which one it connects to, and it might well flip back and forth between them with odd results. If the two had different SSID's the client would be able to chose one or the other. (That can be done when a WRT54G is used as a repeater with 3rd party firmware.) -- Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) fl***@barrow.com fl***@barrow.com (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote in
news:87r7izc9u3.fld@barrow.com: With the facilities of WinXP, that is correct. But most (?) wireless > Well, the other side of that is the situation where you have a > permanently located client which just happens to be in a fringe > area for both the AP and the repeater. Using the same SSID you > cannot select which one it connects to card utilities allow explicit selection between access points with the same SSID by using the BSSID. > and it might well flip I've not seen this in practice. Most (?) wireless card drivers seem > back and forth between them with odd results. reluctant to change... > If the two had This is what I do in mixed 802.11g and 802.11b networks - use > different SSID's the client would be able to chose one or the > other. different APs with SSID specific to each. It improves performance, even though it would be possible to have a single large Extended Service Set. > (That can be done when a WRT54G is used as a repeater Ah. I didn't know that - many thanks. Is this the Sveasoft firmware, > with 3rd party firmware.) or a different variety? Kind regards -- Richard Perkin To email me, change the AT in the address below richard.perkinATmyrealbox.com It's is not, it isn't ain't, and it's it's, not its, if you mean it is. If you don't, it's its. Then too, it's hers. It isn't her's. It isn't our's either. It's ours, and likewise yours and theirs. -- Oxford University Press, Edpress News Richard Perkin <f000nur***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>fl***@barrow.com (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote: My experience has been that my client hardware can be given the> >> Well, the other side of that is the situation where you have a >> permanently located client which just happens to be in a fringe >> area for both the AP and the repeater. Using the same SSID you >> cannot select which one it connects to > >With the facilities of WinXP, that is correct. But most (?) wireless >card utilities allow explicit selection between access points with >the same SSID by using the BSSID. MAC address of the AP... and it will be totally ignored if there is another AP with the same SSID and a better signal! That is with Broadcom based hardware, YMMV of course. >> and it might well flip One example I've seen was where an AP and a repeater were both>> back and forth between them with odd results. > >I've not seen this in practice. Most (?) wireless card drivers seem >reluctant to change... within range. The client was directly across the road from the AP, while the repeater was down the road several yards. Usually the AP would have a 20 dB better signal than the repeater; however, frequently a vehicle driving on the road between the AP and the client would result in a path fade, and the client would switch to the repeater, with a barely but usable signal. Indeed the client was reluctant to switch... and would remain associated with the repeater until its signal would also take a severe enough hit. In the mean time, performance would be seriously degraded compared to what would have been available from the AP (the repeater of course would at best have half the data rate). In essence, it avoided the momentary hit by switching, which indeed resulted in avoiding a total loss of signal perhaps, but also provided noticeably lower performance for a significant length of time too. Show quoteHide quote >> If the two had I'm pretty sure I've tried it with both HyperWRT and Sveasoft firmware,>> different SSID's the client would be able to chose one or the >> other. > >This is what I do in mixed 802.11g and 802.11b networks - use >different APs with SSID specific to each. It improves performance, >even though it would be possible to have a single large Extended >Service Set. > >> (That can be done when a WRT54G is used as a repeater >> with 3rd party firmware.) > >Ah. I didn't know that - many thanks. Is this the Sveasoft firmware, >or a different variety? but can only positively recall checking that with Sveasoft. -- Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) fl***@barrow.com Has Linksys allowed for WPA encryption with the range extender yet?
Dave G Show quoteHide quote "Richard Perkin" <f000nur***@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:38mrbbF5pv2s7U1@individual.net... > fl***@barrow.com (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote in > news:87r7izc9u3.fld@barrow.com: > >> Well, the other side of that is the situation where you have a >> permanently located client which just happens to be in a fringe >> area for both the AP and the repeater. Using the same SSID you >> cannot select which one it connects to > > With the facilities of WinXP, that is correct. But most (?) wireless > card utilities allow explicit selection between access points with > the same SSID by using the BSSID. > >> and it might well flip >> back and forth between them with odd results. > > I've not seen this in practice. Most (?) wireless card drivers seem > reluctant to change... > >> If the two had >> different SSID's the client would be able to chose one or the >> other. > > This is what I do in mixed 802.11g and 802.11b networks - use > different APs with SSID specific to each. It improves performance, > even though it would be possible to have a single large Extended > Service Set. > >> (That can be done when a WRT54G is used as a repeater >> with 3rd party firmware.) > > Ah. I didn't know that - many thanks. Is this the Sveasoft firmware, > or a different variety? > > Kind regards > > -- > > Richard Perkin > To email me, change the AT in the address below > richard.perkinATmyrealbox.com > > It's is not, it isn't ain't, and it's it's, not its, if you mean it > is. If you don't, it's its. Then too, it's hers. It isn't her's. > It isn't our's either. It's ours, and likewise yours and theirs. > -- Oxford University Press, Edpress News "Dave G" <dgrin***@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in news:2SBVd.98505 $pc5.80***@tornado.tampabay.rr.com:> Has Linksys allowed for WPA encryption with the range extender yet? That simple question has a relatively complex answer...The fundamental issue is the the strict definition and standardisation of WDS, Wireless Distribution System. While WDS is described in IEEE 802.1 it is not explicit, and implementations have differed between manufacturers. There is currently an IEEE task group looking at this as part of its work on mesh networks (TGs or 802.11s) Since WPA encryption with TKIP uses the MAC address to derive (part of) the dymanic key, and in a WDS there are multiple MAC addresses, this leads to what might politely be called 'confusion' as the key is dynamically changed. In general, WPA will fail when used across a WDS link. Currently it is only likely to work with compatible firmware and a compatible wireless chipset. I understand that the Sveasoft third party firmware for the WRT54G allows it, and also the Apple Airport Extreme Base Station. Both these are based on a Broadcom chipset. All encryption-related issues are closely linked to the hardware, since the encryption algorithms are numerically intensive and rely on processing at the hardware level rather than in the general purpose cpu within a router's (or other device's) communications processor. And Broadcom has implemented WDS functions in its hardware and reference firmware, which makes it easier for vendors with Broadcom- based products... So even if it were confirmed that Linksys had implemented a 'fix', it would likely be highly product specific. Hope this helps - anyone else? -- Richard Perkin To email me, change the AT in the address below richard.perkinATmyrealbox.com It's is not, it isn't ain't, and it's it's, not its, if you mean it is. If you don't, it's its. Then too, it's hers. It isn't her's. It isn't our's either. It's ours, and likewise yours and theirs. -- Oxford University Press, Edpress News On 4 Mar 2005 01:04:14 GMT, Richard Perkin <f000nur***@hotmail.com>
wrote: (...) >Since WPA encryption with TKIP uses the MAC address to derive (part Good explanation. See:>of) the dymanic key, and in a WDS there are multiple MAC addresses, >this leads to what might politely be called 'confusion' as the key is >dynamically changed. In general, WPA will fail when used across a WDS >link. > >Currently it is only likely to work with compatible firmware and a >compatible wireless chipset. I understand that the Sveasoft third >party firmware for the WRT54G allows it, and also the Apple Airport >Extreme Base Station. Both these are based on a Broadcom chipset. http://www.sveasoft.com/content/view/3/1/ The 18th line down proclaims "WPA over WDS" support. No clue which of the 4ea MAC addresses in WPA they use as part of the WPA-PSK (pre-shared key) or whether its does both WPA with RADIUS or just WPA-PSK. >Hope this helps - anyone else? Nope. I've never actually implimented a WDS bridge as a repeater. Itend to favour two back to back wireless bridges on different channels running full duplex. Therefore, no store and forward bandwidth reduction. More expensive, more complicated, more antennas, but twice as fast. -- # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060 # 831.336.2558 voice http://www.LearnByDestroying.com # je***@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us # je***@cruzio.com AE6KS Jeff Liebermann <je***@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in
news:anmf219llhljuavk31u04s2pjn899heus7@4ax.com: I use and recommend this configuration. While there is a measureable > Nope. I've never actually implimented a WDS bridge as a repeater. > I tend to favour two back to back wireless bridges on different > channels running full duplex. Therefore, no store and forward > bandwidth reduction. More expensive, more complicated, more > antennas, but twice as fast. throughput drop and an increase in latency, the drop in throughput is significantly less than the single radio repeater device. However, my experience is that this configuration is also likely to fail with WPA. The reason is that such back-to-back solutions are generally built from a pair of multi-mode access points, one in Access Point mode, the other in Wireless Client (or AP Client) mode. And all (?) recent multi-mode access points that I'm aware of implement Repeater mode. In other words, because they use WDS for the repeater mode, they are also likely to use WDS for Wireless Client mode. Which means that the frames will again have 4 MAC addresses - and as you point out, which of these is used for the key is unspecified. I have tried and failed to get WPA-PSK working across a wireless client device, so I suspect it won't work when part of a 'back-to- back repeater' configuration. However, perhaps I didn't try hard enough - to be honest, I was expecting it to fail :( Kind regards -- Richard Perkin To email me, change the AT in the address below richard.perkinATmyrealbox.com It's is not, it isn't ain't, and it's it's, not its, if you mean it is. If you don't, it's its. Then too, it's hers. It isn't her's. It isn't our's either. It's ours, and likewise yours and theirs. -- Oxford University Press, Edpress News On 4 Mar 2005 04:20:01 GMT, Richard Perkin <f000nur***@hotmail.com>
wrote: Show quoteHide quote >Jeff Liebermann <je***@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in Not mine. I use back to back DWL-900AP+, WAP54G, or other>news:anmf219llhljuavk31u04s2pjn899heus7@4ax.com: > >> Nope. I've never actually implimented a WDS bridge as a repeater. >> I tend to favour two back to back wireless bridges on different >> channels running full duplex. Therefore, no store and forward >> bandwidth reduction. More expensive, more complicated, more >> antennas, but twice as fast. >I use and recommend this configuration. While there is a measureable >throughput drop and an increase in latency, the drop in throughput is >significantly less than the single radio repeater device. > >However, my experience is that this configuration is also likely to >fail with WPA. The reason is that such back-to-back solutions are >generally built from a pair of multi-mode access points, one in >Access Point mode, the other in Wireless Client (or AP Client) mode. "transparent bridge" radios. They can shovel multiple MAC addresses and do NOT attempt to use the client mode. One radio is in bridge mode, the other in access point mode. The internet end of the puzzle is also a DWL-900AP+ or WAP54G in bridge mode. It then connects to some random router which then connects to a DSL or cable modem. Lots of boxes, but it always works. Sometimes, there's also a bandwidth manager in the chain (in various places depending upon what I'm trying to do). In any case, the only device that's doing client mode is the users wireless client. >And all (?) recent multi-mode access points that I'm aware of Agreed. WDS and client mode seem to go together. I'm going to resist>implement Repeater mode. In other words, because they use WDS for the >repeater mode, they are also likely to use WDS for Wireless Client >mode. Which means that the frames will again have 4 MAC addresses - >and as you point out, which of these is used for the key is >unspecified. the temptation to look at the Sveasoft Alchemy source code to see how they implimented WDS. I got work to do tonight. >I have tried and failed to get WPA-PSK working across a wireless I don't see why it shouldn't work. The only open question I can think>client device, so I suspect it won't work when part of a 'back-to- >back repeater' configuration. However, perhaps I didn't try hard >enough - to be honest, I was expecting it to fail :( of is which MAC address to use for part of the encryption key. It's impossible to tell which key is used by sniffing, but looking at the Alchemy source should offer a clue (or answer). However, if someone became creative with the WPA-PSK implimentation, even if both ends used the proper MAC address, there will still be some form of failure. -- # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060 # 831.336.2558 voice http://www.LearnByDestroying.com # je***@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us # je***@cruzio.com AE6KS 
Other interesting topics
WPA vs WEP problems...
WRT54GS and external antenna... how do i secure a wireless network How should I implement security Anyone have experience with handheld "sniffers" Sveasoft dead? WGR614v5 added new antenna How to firmware upgrade Proxim 8551 AP without AP Controller? D-Link G604T problem? Netgear WGR614 v5 configuration |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
