SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

May 2009

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Tom Rosmond <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Tom Rosmond <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 18 May 2009 07:44:20 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (87 lines)
 

On Sun, 2009-05-17 at 22:08 -0500, Steven Timm wrote:
> I see the same "Warning:  Driver for device wlan0 recommend version 
> 21...."
> on a pure Red Hat 5 update 3 machine, so whatever that warning
> is coming from, it's not from anything that Troy or the rest of SL
> is doing.
> 

I wonder if this is more a 64 bit environment issue than SL (or any
other distribution).  Besides the warning about driver mismatch, there
is the misidentification of the device by both 'iwconfig' and 'lspci'
with 64bit SL.  There must be other examples of problems like this
unique to 64 bit SL environments.


> Warning: Driver for device wlan0 recommend version 21 of Wireless 
> Extension,
> but has been compiled with version 20, therefore some driver features
> may not be available...
> 
> And my wireless is working mostly OK.
> 
'mostly OK' is about how I would describe how my SL wireless works, too.
But there are times when that is not good enough.  For example, I
connect via VPN to a remote site.  On the 32bit system the connection is
always immediate and reliable.  On the 64bit SL system I can make a
connection about 20% of the time.  I suspect the negotiation between the
VPN client and server is sensitive to the quality of the connection and
cannot connect most of the time.  That is my biggest problem.


Tom R.


> 
> Steve Timm
> 
> 
> On Sun, 17 May 2009, Troy Dawson wrote:
> 
> > Hi Tom,
> > I am going to snip parts of your message out.  Not that I don't think it is 
> > important, but more so I can concentrate on one thing.
> >
> > Tom Rosmond wrote:
> > ... snip ...
> >> 
> >> Warning: Driver for device wlan0 recommend version 21 of Wireless
> >> Extension,
> >> but has been compiled with version 20, therefore some driver features
> >> may not be available...
> >> 
> >> wlan0     IEEE 802.11  ESSID:"olympic"            Mode:Managed 
> >> Frequency:2.437 GHz  Access Point:
> >> 00:1B:2F:E3:DF:4A             Bit Rate=1 Mb/s   Tx-Power=27 dBm 
> >> Retry min limit:7   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr=2352 B             Link 
> >> Quality=51/100  Signal level=-62 dBm  Noise level=-95 dBm
> >>           Rx invalid nwid:0  Rx invalid crypt:0  Rx invalid frag:0
> >>           Tx excessive retries:0  Invalid misc:0   Missed beacon:0
> >> 
> > ... snip ...
> >> 
> >> 3. Although the versions of madwifi and wireless-tools in SL 5.3 should
> >> be more current than I installed on the 32 bit system, the warning about
> >> version mismatch for the 64 bit system suggests otherwise.  This I don't
> >> understand.
> >> 
> > ... snip ...
> >
> > This has me concerned because this isn't the first time I've seen this 
> > message.
> >
> > I'm worried that perhaps the machine I am compiling these on has a wrong 
> > version of a package or two.  Despite my efforts I am not the greatest 
> > wireless expert and it's possible I'm doing something wrong with the 
> > compiling.  From what I can tell, my 32 bit and 64 bit compile area's are the 
> > same for wireless.  But maybe I am looking at the wrong packages.
> >
> > Does anyone know where I should start looking to track down this error?  Or 
> > even if there is anything I can do to fix it?
> >
> > Troy
> >
> 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2