Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Teeth-grindingly bad router problems today

Yes, the new router arrived (thanks for the helpful advice, readers). But I want to be bloggging and gardening, not taking hours to install a fucking router.

On another note, except on the same topic, I've noticed that the router tends to go bad when tenants are active and moving about the house, and (therefore I assume) using their cellphones. I've noticed the same thing in Internet cafés (granted, in Thailand) -- the connection will be fine, and then some dude in a wife-beater T-shirt will walk in with a phone to his ear, and the connection promptly goes to shit. Even with iPhones.

My question: Is it plausible/likely that cellphones optimize their network surroundings for themselves? For example, by messing around with the router? Often when I get back online it's with a different IP address, suggesting, to my paranoid mind, that I've been kicked off the network and given a different, and lower-ranking, number.

0
No votes yet
Updated: 

Comments

jo6pac's picture
Submitted by jo6pac on

When I bought mine most of the geeks in amazon Q&A area were telling people to use the low baud rate for best results. Mine is set for 2.4 so the cell phone doesn't bother it and there is no drop in speed. My neighbor is 300' from and it works fine for him. That me but I'm sure there are many with a hell of lot better understanding then me.

My new moto x is confusing me at this time.

Good luck

quixote's picture
Submitted by quixote on

Cell phones, unless they're made to hop onto wifi networks in range, use the cellular network and shouldn't have any effect on wifi connections. ?? I think. If I ask myself how I know this, I realize it's just a slightly educated guess.

Quite a few smartphones could do that these days, I think, but the cell companies don't want to lose a penny from you, so they don't usually let it be automatic.

What's your bandwidth? If you have several people all using the same router for fairly intensive tasks, wifi phone calls, playing interactive web-based games, god knows what, then it could simply be that things choke. My guess would be you'd need at least 40Mbps +- 10 Mbps. Others here know a lot more about this than I do.

BruceMcF's picture
Submitted by BruceMcF on

Yes, a lot of new phones can jump to wifi when available. That can generate WiFi channel congestion. Not broadcasting the router SSID name can help with that.

It sure sounds like that is happening if your IP address is changing.

Rainbow Girl's picture
Submitted by Rainbow Girl on

I think I am having exactly the same problem with my router. Before tenants moved in upstairs, wifi was fast, realiable and also "on" when I was in the "yard." Since they moved in, it's constantly asking me for my password, or looking like it has all bars lit but I can't connect to the web, and the distance issue (the extra 60 ft into the "yard") -- no wifi past 40 feet from the router.

I'm thinking it has to be something to do with either (a) their wi-fi connection gumming up mine (even though both are password protected) and/or (b) their smartphones are gumming up the works.

Incidentally, also having reverse problem. I have Tmobile cell phone and it worked fine until upstairs moved in. Now I have to attempt dialing 4-7 times just to get a connection so the phone rings on the other side. Any idea what might be causing this "reverse" problem?

Submitted by lambert on

.... except for the extra layer of cell-phone madness with the Tmobile.

That I do not understand at all.

Anyhow, no posting from me today even though I had big plans because of the problems; I'm going to give up the unequal struggle, I think, and try for an installation tomorrow. Grrr!!!!!

Rainbow Girl's picture
Submitted by Rainbow Girl on

Isn't this all part of the Crapadelic telecom system we have in Third World USA?

Any readers know if this type of idiotic interference/gumming up occurs anywhere outside the U.S., i.e., if these problems are caused by the cheapskate infrastructure and architecture used by our U.S. telecom (and I include broadband here) providers?

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

with that carrier, when it comes to reception (or so it seems).

Works best for us when we're on the road, or along interstate highway routes.

BTW, I've heard that Sprint (I believe) may be buying out T-Mobile. Not sure what that would mean for your reception in New York.

Rainbow Girl's picture
Submitted by Rainbow Girl on

Alexa -

What do you mean by "there's no in between" for TMobile?

Yes, Sprint is looking to expand its Crapadelic Telecom Empire by buying TMobile. This past year they destroyed CLEAR - the broadband system that is so good it had to be crushed - it was entirely portable, too -- i.e., you could have a stick in your machine, or a portable modem, and the speed was awesome. It still exists but they're not selling any new accounts and it's only a matter of time when they phase out CLEAR entirely.

Looks like we're on the eve of the SuperCrapification of US Telecom where CrapSprint and CrapComcast will be duking it out as two mutant Godzillas fighting to win the Uber Monopoly to bleed Americans dry while delivering worse-than-dialup across the spectrum (pun intended) of communication devices.

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

great reception--or none at all (with T-Mobile).

Now, we almost always get great reception from T-Mobile when we're traveling on the interstate highway system.

Regarding Sprint's networks, they are somewhat limited (in scope, regarding how extensive their tower network is), but there service is actually pretty decent.

And the price (for a Sprint plan) is much more reasonable than for Verizon service, or for that matter, than for T-Mobile.

Of course, that's probably according to region (so useless information).

That's too bad about CLEAR. Heard about the CLEAR network from talk radio host Thom Hartmann. But it wasn't available in the area, as it turned out. Hartmann said that it was an excellent service, at a real decent price.

So you're probably right--that's why it had to go!

;-D

Barmitt O'Bamney's picture
Submitted by Barmitt O'Bamney on

There may be some things you can do to make the best of it (at least for yourself).
If you suspect phone traffic is actually using your wifi bandwidth and not just causing interference, you could use mac address whitelisting to allow only your tenants' pcs and laptops. Other non-phone devices like internet enabled TVs or dvd players can eat ALL your dsl connection's bandwidth by themselves. Just one person in their room watching a movie on Netflix would do it. Mac address whitelisting, if your router has this capability, would allow you to restrict what devices can connect to your wifi and get to use your airwaves. A dsl connection is a very scarce resource if it is being shared among people doing anything besides web browsing and email. It is not unreasonable therefore to take steps to restrict its use to basic communication needs.

If there is a reason why you prefer to have the same ip address on your local network, you should be able to reserve one and assign it to your pc/laptop through the DHCP server setup on the router (assuming you do DHCP on the router).

If you want to be less affected by the resource contention, you can investigate the Quality of Service ( QoS ) abilities of the router. If you could put up with tethering your pc/laptop to the router by ethernet cable, you could probably assign a prority "maximum" level to the ethernet port you use to plug in. Ethernet throughput is always going to beat wifi. Turn the volume up to 11 for yourself, and if there is the ability to set QoS per mac address, turn it down to something less speedy for the other hosts owned by the tenants. Hey! You're a landlord, so you've got lots of important responsibilities. Your tweets MUST get through.

Submitted by lambert on

(That said, I haven't measured anything.) These tenants are far more studious than past tenants; they aren't playing video games I am almost sure. And when I see one of them leave the house -- presumably having called somewhere just beforehand -- a loss of contact with the WiFi is almost guaranteed. I've also used this DSL setup literally for years (though I've improved bandwidth periodically as new modems come out).

That's a very good suggestion on a cable (for me). I'd have to run a 100-footer out into the garden, though, and I'm a little unclear how to do that (loss of signal; rain; UV). A friend suggested protecting the cable with a hose, which is brilliant, but how the heck do I get the cable through the hose?! (One of those "set fire to the paper bag round the golfball questions...)

Barmitt O'Bamney's picture
Submitted by Barmitt O'Bamney on

Even if it's not a problem of bandwidth exhaustion, there still could be a benefit to using a mac address whitelist - simply to reduce the number of connected devices. I know from dredging through many user reviews on retail sites that some wifi routers/APs/repeaters will start to drop connections after a certain number of clients connect simultaneously - and not a high number approaching the maximum of a subnet either. As mentioned by another poster, some phones will connect to a wifi network which they have the key to, whenever it is in range. So even if the phone's owner is not using the network actively with their phone, and not burning up the available bw, they still could be triggering network problems which appear just like congestion, simply by contributing to the proliferation of connected wifi devices.

The way to get ethernet cable through a garden hose is to buy a reel of "fish tape" from a hardware store. It's sticky and smells awful just like you'd imagine from its name, but fish tape allows you to run cable of all kinds right through walls, AC ducts, hollow logs and empty suits for great distances. Usually a reel of fish tape is 50 feet long. Bigger reels certainly do exist, but fifty foot reels are what you should be able to find on the shelf any day. A fish tape is actually flat steel ribbon approx 1/8" wide and 1/16" thick wound up on a reel. So to reach 100ft out into a garden using a typical fish tape, you'd need to connect two fifty foot hoses by their brass fittings - after pulling the cable through only one of them with the fish tape first. Pull it through one at a time, then connect the hoses. When joining the hoses, I'd double up on the teflon tape at the connection between the hoses to keep water out.

But more precisely, I would run the "fish tape" through the hose with literal fishing line -like 20lb mono - first, instead of the ethernet cable I want to use. Obviously you will need more a piece of mono longer than 50 feet. Attach the mono to the head of the fish tape, and push them through in parallel. I'm sure the fish tape could be worked 50 feet through down the length of a hose by itself, and dragging 20lb mono with it would not feel appreciably different. But if you were instead to attach pvc coated ethernet cable directly to the fish tape it would be much more likely to get stuck somewhere out in the middle because of all the added bulk and friction of the cable. Once the monofilament line has been run through, the knot or heavy tape connecting it to the fish tape can be cut, the line secured at the far end of the hose, and the fish tape retracted back to near end. The monofilament line can then be attached at the near end to the end of some cat5e ethernet on a spool and the cat5 can then be pulled through the hose. Do not cut the ethernet cable off the spool yet. Repeat the same trick with the fish tape and the fishing line on the second piece of garden hose and then pull the ethernet cable sticking out of the first hose through the second hose. Join the two hoses in the middle, cut off however much extra cat5 you think you'll need to complete the run, and Vie-OH-la! there's your 100+ foot run of ethernet strung through a 100ft garden hose. Yes this will take some time, but you didn't have to resort to using a cigarette lighter, a can of WD40, a gerbil and that hideously expensive asbestos fiber twine you can only get off Ebay on the downlow from China.

I realize you're probably not very interested in 100ft ethernet run out into your garden to connect your laptop to a router, but when you say things like how the heck do I get the 100ft cable through the garden hose, I can't not think about it. I have thought about running ethernet through water hose before in order to disguise it. But I never thought much about what it would take to do very long runs of it though.

This all requires the garden hose to be laid out straight and flat on the ground someplace, with minimal disturbances, such as bumps, to the path of the cable to be pulled through it. Arranging things so you are pushing/pulling down an incline would be even better than level and flat. Fish tape is flexible in one plane, and it's smooth because it's steel, and also because it's steel, it's rigid enough to be pushed. But the network cable being pulled through after it is limp and has a soft jacketing and it will naturally snake side to side from its "memory" of being coiled up on a spool, and so it will accumulate more and more friction, tending to hold it back, as it travels forward down the hose.

Perhaps a better, and more interesting use (or a later re-use) of an ethernet cable run outside into a garden area would be to connect up an outdoor access point, used as an access point for the same wifi network or as a repeater. The ethernet cable -disguised and protected by a garden hose- would also carry the necessary electrical power for the AP, in an arrangement called POE -or OPE, one of those- which means variously Peace On Earth, or Power Over Ethernet.

It could simply be that 100 feet out into the garden, and an unknown distance even further away from the router, your wifi signal is on the ragged edge of failure and is just waiting for any excuse to quit on you. it may have nothing to do with how many wifi clients there are and how much bw they use. An outdoor AP or repeater, connected to your network by a reliable fast wired connection - could be the ticket to stress free wifi.

Submitted by lambert on

... and it's one of the best things I ever did for myself, working out here. So you can see how your "power station" appoach of both power and ethernet is very attractive.

I'm not understanding the "fish tape." Why is it not like pushing a string? Is it rigid, like what electricians use to "fish" through walls?

I might not do this this year, since things are so tight after the winter, but next year!

File attachments: 

Barmitt O'Bamney's picture
Submitted by Barmitt O'Bamney on

Ok I see. Unfortunately, POE isn't going to power your laptop. It's a way of carrying low dc voltages to wifi access points using the same network cabling that ties the wifi into the wired network. It's very specific to the low current draw hardware, like a wifi ap, not general and available for any purpose. The wire in your orange cable is 16 or 14 ga, and the twisted wire pairs in ethernet cable are 24 ga. You could run a 1200 watt hairdryer off that orange cable but the max wattage for POE is limited to 25 watts.

POE used to be kind of exotic, and limited mainly to outdoor APs where there was no existing ac power, and corporate installations where dozens of APs, typically line the ceilings of hallways of office buildings and where separate ac power drops were likewise in too short supply. But now you can find POE included even in budget access point hardware. An access point with POE will have an "injector" which connects the ap and an ethernet switch, with one cable going to each. It is inserted into the ethernet line you could say. The power supply for the access point is plugged into the injector, instead of being plugged directly into the ap, and the dc current is then carried over the ethernet cable to the ap. Schematically it looks like this:


Above is an older, very inexpensive wifi-G ap with poe in its box. ( I am actually using an identical model of this right now) You can see the familiar wall wart dc power supply on the lower left, the antenna down in front, and the little gizmo with the rj45 connectors in the upper left is the POE injector. This model is for strictly indoor use. An outdoor model would work the same way but has a ruggedized rain proof exterior and provisions for being mounted securely to a post, or building exterior, and for earth grounding.

Maybe a solar panel array for the laptop? Or a goat on a treadmill?


This is a 50ft reel of steel fish tape. It is exactly what electricians use to "fish" wire through walls. They call it tape instead of wire, I suppose, because it's flat, but also probably because it's rolled out in a sheet and then cut, not drawn like wire. That probably has an effect on the "grain" alignment in the steel. It's thin and flat enough to flex, at least in one plane, Y, corresponding to its thickness- but stiff in the X plane of its width. So it can bend to snake around a corner, but it doesn't bend every which way, piling up on itself like string when you push on it. I would think you could push steel fish tape 50 feet into a hose. It might get slow and difficult, maybe, but it would go through. It might help to have a second pair of hands wiggling the hose in the middle wherever the tape begins to buckle and bind, in order to break up the contact.

Submitted by lambert on

... but I don't see why I couldn't both a real power cable and the ethernet cable through a hose. Electrical interference? With real power, I could set up a bug zapper or even a desk lamp (probably need both). It's nice to work a night with the screen glowing :-)

Barmitt O'Bamney's picture
Submitted by Barmitt O'Bamney on

Since you're serious about this I'm sure you know you could make that power arrangement permanent. You could dig a trench, lay conduit in it, string Romex through (and network cable too), bring it up into some kind of above ground post and box construction -tastefully disguised as a garden gnome maybe, or a lawn jockey (with working lantern that actually lights up! ) and have outdoor power that could pass building code muster. Maybe that's already a long range plan. You've alluded to doing something with wires next year, I think, in another post.

As to making the current improvised arrangement more durable, fishing both cat5 and heavy extension cord through garden hose would be very tough indeed, if it's even possible. For it to be possible at all over any distance, let alone long runs up to 100ft, you would have to learn how to cut the plug ends off or one end off the extension cord, and put new NEMA plugs on. Extension cords with the plugs still attached won't run through a garden hose - unless "garden hose" means something totally different up there in Maine. I know that plugs can be bought for power cords and put on. http://www.grainger.com/product/HUBBELL-WIRING-DEVICE-KELLEMS-Plug-4A250
Of course, Underwriter's Laboratory would drop a double indemnity clause in their underwear if you told them you planned to chop up some UL-listed power cord and re-terminate it yourself and then just leave it outdoors. I've never done this myself, and I'm not advising others to do it. On one hand, there are just three wires involved here so this is not rocket science. But on the other hand, the consequences for doing something a little bit wrong here are potentially lethal. (Nagging question that has always given me pause: once you've clipped the molded plug off the end of a power cord, how do you keep water out of the plug you replace it with?) Setting aside whether UL ever recover from their shock (!) or not, running ac and data cable in one garden hose might be unnecessary to achieve your goals.

With powerline networking modules you can make your heavy gauge AC extension cord carry the network data, instead of making the thin data cable try to carry power, as in POE. If you have a power line run to the point in the yard where you want to camp with your laptop, the power line itself could be used as the "backhaul" to the router by a wifi range extender, or by a second AP designed for outdoor use. In theory, powerline network modules could connect an ethernet equipped laptop or an outdoor AP back to the router inside the house. I say "in theory" because in practice I don't think any of these devices are meant to be used outdoors.

Powerline networking isn't as fast or reliable as ethernet. It's like wifi that way, and like wifi, when you read the max transfer speed that is supposed to be possible, be it 200mbps or 500mbps, you have to remember that you will never actually see that speed in practice. But powerline networking, or Homeplug as it's called, apparently works pretty well nowadays, with some caveats.

Linksys even has a homeplug product, the PLWK400-NP, that combines a wifi range extender inside the powerline network module. PLug one module into a socket near your router and connect it with ethernet to an open port, plug the other module (wifi enabled) into a socket someplace where the wifi signal is weak to extend the coverage of your wifi network. There may be other powerline network products that also include wifi extenders but that's the only one I know of.

Now for the extended list of caveats concerning homeplug stuff in general - powerline network modules are sold in pairs and can't be mixed and matched. Another catch with any powerline networking equipment is that the sockets used must be on the same circuit breaker panel, and for good performance they must be on the same bus of the same breaker. With that said, however, they are often plugged (HA!) as a better, cheaper way to extend a network around the house when the wifi router doesn't reach everywhere and you don't want to run any ethernet cable. Here is a customer giving his review on Amazon for an all weather, outdoor AC socket housing, crowing over his successful use of the weatherproof box to shelter his Linksys powerline wifi network extender to provide wireless coverage to his backyard.
Overall this Taymac outlet cover + Linksys powerline adapter with wifi was a great solution for outdoor wi-fi coverage.
Of course that review is just a snapshot of one happy customer. He doesn't say how many years the outlet cover kept his Linksys powerline+wifi thingy working, or whether he always unplugs it and takes it inside after each time he uses it, or whether he forgot to do that one day in October, and an overnight frost caused his Linksys PLWK400 to destroy itself. Leaving that model or any other model of powerline network module outdoors may reduce their service lifespan from years to months or weeks for all I know. I'm fairly certain though it's not a use of the product that would be covered under the warranty. This example brings me finally to another point: wifi networks can be expanded wirelessly.

The typical way to connect home wifi infrastructure pieces of course is to forgo wire for the backhaul to the router and get a range extender or repeater.

(This is not the best way, however, merely the most typical consumer grade solution. The best way, the professional grade method for speed and reliabilty which you will typically see in business environments, is to have multiple wifi APs wired into the same ethernet network backbone. One SSID and security setup - but with multiple APs placed in different locations, set on different channels. It's the Right Way To Do Things.)

The range extender or repeater device is placed close enough to talk to the router but it can also talk to the wifi devices in the problem area. The wifi signal is then relayed in both directions. This way you would only need a power cable, and not a data cable as well. But there's a catch of course: you would need a power outlet somewhere close enough to talk to the router, as well as one further out where you want to be with your laptop. But there's an even bigger catch after that: Range extenders generally suck as a solution because they impose an overhead of approx. 50% on network throughput for devices in the area they cover. This is because they use the same radio to receive your signal and then relay it onwards to the router, and vice versa for the router's replies. (For the Linksys powerline wifi extender mentioned above I think this would not be true, since it communicates with the wifi AP/router over a wired network) And wifi range extenders additionally suck because usually you will no longer have a unified wifi network. The router will have an ssid and the extender will have a different ssid. Sometimes extenders and routers can work together to allow a shared ssid, if carefully chosen for compatibility. In a lot of cases though they will not. Networking hardware companies are always rushing out new generation products before every detail of the wifi networking protocols are fully finalized resulting in little incompatibilties like this. Most devices sold as "repeaters" are no more than range extenders. But real repeaters exist which do not have the suckage of extenders, but you must expect to pay more for them. Full featured routers and access points generally can be put in wireless repeater mode to another piece of wifi infrastructure. I have saved the worst for last for some reason, a clear indication that I've been rambling and so I'll stop.

mellon's picture
Submitted by mellon on

big chunk of bandwideth for yourself and YOUR phones and make everything that doesnt go to you and your stuff varying degrees of slower.

You can set it up so that the stuff that needs to get through does and all the junk is filtered through a bottleneck that will "work" but will make them decide to get their own Internet service if they want speed for their own phones or netflix. Look for QOS by service types and by mac address Prioritize your own stuff .

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

but I think that I've figured out that our cell phones definitely can cause interference with our internet connection.

And that is regardless of the cell phone carrier (we've had at least five or six in the past almost couple of decades).

Anyhoo, I try to situate all our phones as far away (even in a car) as I can when I'm seriously engaged (on the internet).

Good luck!

mellon's picture
Submitted by mellon on

Also, have you thought about getting a USB Ethernet adaptor for your laptop, just for when you are sitting somewhere and don't need wireless. Also is it a dual band router, and if so, are you taking advantage of the upper band?

is it compatible with OpenWRT?

Submitted by lambert on

Somewhere I have a USB adaptor I bought i Bangkok (of all places). The new modem is compatible with Open WRT, yes.

Here is the log from the last #FAIL:

Jul 22 14:54:38 shuntings-MacBook-Air.local airportd[80]: _handleLinkEvent: Got an error trying to queyer WiFi for power. Resetting state variables.
Jul 22 14:54:39 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::startScanMultiple: Scan request received from 'airportd' (pid 80) (2 SSIDs, 0 BSSIDs).
Jul 22 14:54:40 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::getScanResult: All scan results returned for 'airportd' (pid 80).
Jul 22 14:54:40 shuntings-MacBook-Air.local sandboxd[137] ([80]): airportd(80) deny file-read-metadata /Library/Preferences/com.apple.security-common.plist
Jul 22 14:54:40 shuntings-MacBook-Air.local sandboxd[137] ([80]): airportd(80) deny file-read-data /Library/Preferences/com.apple.security-common.plist
Jul 22 14:54:41 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::startScan: Broadcast scan request received from 'airportd' (pid 80) ().
Jul 22 14:54:41 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::getScanResult: All scan results returned for 'airportd' (pid 80).
Jul 22 14:54:41 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::startScan: Broadcast scan request received from 'airportd' (pid 80) ().
Jul 22 14:54:41 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::getScanResult: All scan results returned for 'airportd' (pid 80).
Jul 22 14:55:45 shuntings-MacBook-Air.local airportd[80]: _handleLinkEvent: Got an error trying to queyer WiFi for power. Resetting state variables.
Jul 22 14:55:47 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::startScanMultiple: Scan request received from 'airportd' (pid 80) (2 SSIDs, 0 BSSIDs).
Jul 22 14:55:48 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::getScanResult: All scan results returned for 'airportd' (pid 80).
Jul 22 14:55:48 shuntings-MacBook-Air.local sandboxd[137] ([80]): airportd(80) deny file-read-metadata /Library/Preferences/com.apple.security-common.plist
Jul 22 14:55:48 shuntings-MacBook-Air.local sandboxd[137] ([80]): airportd(80) deny file-read-data /Library/Preferences/com.apple.security-common.plist
Jul 22 14:55:49 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::startScan: Broadcast scan request received from 'airportd' (pid 80) ().
Jul 22 14:55:49 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::getScanResult: All scan results returned for 'airportd' (pid 80).
Jul 22 14:55:49 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::startScan: Broadcast scan request received from 'airportd' (pid 80) ().
Jul 22 14:55:49 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::getScanResult: All scan results returned for 'airportd' (pid 80).
Jul 22 14:55:55 shuntings-MacBook-Air.local airportd[80]: _doAutoJoin: Already associated to “NETGEAR77”. Bailing on auto-join.
Jul 22 14:56:01 shuntings-MacBook-Air.local airportd[80]: _handleLinkEvent: Got an error trying to queyer WiFi for power. Resetting state variables.
Jul 22 14:56:08 shuntings-MacBook-Air.local airportd[80]: _processSystemPSKAssoc: No password for network [ssid=NETGEAR77, bssid=e0:46:9a:5a:b7:51, security=WPA2 Personal, rssi=-80, channel= [channelNumber=2(2GHz), channelWidth={20MHz}], ibss=0] in the system keychain
Jul 22 14:56:20 shuntings-MacBook-Air.local airportd[80]: _doAutoJoin: Already associated to “NETGEAR77”. Bailing on auto-join.
Jul 22 14:56:20 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::startScan: Broadcast scan request received from 'airportd' (pid 80) ().
Jul 22 14:56:20 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::getScanResult: All scan results returned for 'airportd' (pid 80).
Jul 22 14:56:20 shuntings-MacBook-Air.local sandboxd[137] ([80]): airportd(80) deny file-read-metadata /Library/Preferences/com.apple.security-common.plist
Jul 22 14:56:20 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::startScan: Broadcast scan request received from 'airportd' (pid 80) ().
Jul 22 14:56:20 shuntings-MacBook-Air kernel[0]: IO80211ScanManager::getScanResult: All scan results returned for 'airportd' (pid 80).
Jul 22 14:56:20 shuntings-MacBook-Air.local sandboxd[137] ([80]): airportd(80) deny file-read-data /Library/Preferences/com.apple.security-common.plist

I rebooted, cleared the Mac Air caches, threw away the old configuration. Now it works (temporarily).

Splashoil's picture
Submitted by Splashoil on

Start from the wired modem. Use a switch to separate new router and old router. Keep everyone else on the old setup. Get the new one working to your satisfaction just your personal stuff on it. When you are happy, consider adding others. I used to provide free but unsupported access until I kept getting into issues I could not control.
As you set up your equipment keep a log and use speedtest utility to monitor progress. With additional support from NSA I use WPA2 encryption with random passwords.
Good luck!

Submitted by lambert on

I don't own a switch and I don't want to wait 'til the start of next month to buy one.

However, the existing router has ethernet sockets on the back of it, so presumably I can hook up two routers in parallel. Yes?

mellon's picture
Submitted by mellon on

Dont get a hub, get a switch. And get a 8 port one, you'll always find a use for them. If you can find gigabit ethernet that is preferable for transfering stuff around your house but it wont help you with the internet speeds. 100 base T is enough for that. I would also get a USB ethernet adaptor that you know works for configuring your router, etc. Find out what USB ethernet drivers are part of the OS and work well.

mellon's picture
Submitted by mellon on

That would use up a lot of bandwidth

You shoud try sniffing the traffic to see what's going over it. You would need either an old non-switched hub (the easiest way but you will miss some of the traffic) or a machine with two Ethernet cards.. (in theory you could use your laptop and two USB-Ethernet adaptors)

Then use Wireshark.

Rainbow Girl's picture
Submitted by Rainbow Girl on

Lambert, in my situation, if I run an ethernet cable from my inside router to the outdoor area and into my laptop), would that - under the logic of your set up (looks ingenious!) - do you think "extend" the "reach" of the router into the yard?

Just seeing if I can apply some of your Ben Franklinian ingenuity to my situation!

Submitted by lambert on

Although you need an Ethernet port on your computer, which my Air does not have. (Mellon suggests an Ethernet -> USB adaptor (!).

The hose discussion is to protect from rain, UV, etc., though. I'd be reluctant to run a bare Ethernet cable out in the yard.

mellon's picture
Submitted by mellon on

Yes, but it wont be "wireless" (duh) OTOH, its more secure, more reliable and doesnt require a lot of thought on your part.. or anybody's. To extend wifi, I always recommend getting a better antenna. Or make one. For example, a collinear made out of little pieces of coax works well. Google 2.4 GHz collinear.