LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Linux - Hardware (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-hardware-18/)
-   -   Netgear WG111v3 stops transmitting after short while (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-hardware-18/netgear-wg111v3-stops-transmitting-after-short-while-814145/)

LinkSlayer64 06-14-2010 06:46 PM

Netgear WG111v3 stops transmitting after short while
 
Ok, so running Ubuntu Server Edition 10.04
kernel 2.6.32-22-generic-pae
lsusb brings this:
Bus 001 Device 002: ID 0846:4260 NetGear, Inc. WG111(v3) 54 Mbps Wireless [RealTek RTL8187B]

So the problem is that puppy, a USB Wi-Fi adapter if I unplug and plug it back in, it'll respond for a little bit, but eventually will stop transmitting.
my cross-over connection works fine connecting to my other pc (the one I'm currently typing this on) in case that helps.
thanks in advanced

forget to add:

may this have something to do with it?

end of dmesg output

[ 20.000411] wlan0: associated
[ 20.006068] ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): wlan0: link becomes ready
[ 23.672009] eth0: no IPv6 routers present
[ 30.388010] wlan0: no IPv6 routers present
[ 533.404447] wlan0: deauthenticated from 00:24:b2:61:1a:93 (Reason: 2)

frankbell 06-14-2010 09:42 PM

It sounds like a hardware problem. The best way to prove or disprove that is to swap in known-good hardware and compare. If you've been using it exclusive in one port, try it in another port.

Does someone you know have a known good adapter (preferably the same model but that's not essential) that you could borrow for a test?

I've known lots of folks who wasted weeks looking for a software solution to what turned out to be bad hardware. All the configuration options in the world won't fix a loose connection.

Kenarkies 06-15-2010 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frankbell (Post 4003733)
It sounds like a hardware problem.

I second that. I have been using a WG111 successfully on several machines under various Ubuntus without problem. The references to ipv6 in dmesg may arise because ipv6 doesn't seem to be supported by many of the low-end wireless routers. Most likely not your problem.

You could also try a live CD such as Knoppix, and see if the same problem occurs.

Ken

LinkSlayer64 06-15-2010 04:09 PM

thanks, forgot to try another port, and the adapter has always worked on Windows (its not linux, but it tells me that it's not the adapter itself) it may also be because of a USB extension cord i'm using, thanks for the tips!

Spoke to soon it didn't work, not even without the extender...oi, guess I'll just try a live distro
Well, I tried ubuntu linux same version, but the Desktop edition, and that one worked fine? any ideas? maybe if I get network manager or something? currently it's a text based system, but I really don't have any clue how to fix this

frankbell 06-15-2010 09:53 PM

This does sound like a puzzler.

Let me sort this out to make sure I'm hearing you correctly:

1. The adapter works fine with Windows--that is, it did not drop connection (Is that on the same box or a different box?).

2. It worked fine with a live CD without dropping the connection on the same computer.

3. It worked fine with Ubuntu desktop on the same computer.

(If I am wrong about the "on the same computer" part, it may be the box itself--the USB hardware may have gone squirrelly.)

When you ask, "maybe if I get network manager or something?" does that mean you are configuring the connection through rc.wireless? (Wherever Ubuntu hides it; if it were Slackware, I would know exactly where it is.)

I can understand why you are puzzled. It's hardware--it should work with any platform that can see it.

I'm not a big fan of gnome-network-manager: I prefer wicd. For testing purposes, trying one or the other would be a good next step.

I was taught that the key to trouble-shooting is to take it slow: one thing at a time, keep good notes, and don't let my natural impatience cause me to miss a step. Two things at a time narrows it down to two, when what one wants to do is narrow it down to one.

LinkSlayer64 06-15-2010 10:18 PM

ok, no the windows box is different
The livecd was on the same box as the ubuntu server though

and I can't even remember where I configured it, I know it was some file I edited, not using a program (besides nano) i'm sure I'd be able to figure it out considering I spent quite a time trying to

I'll try using wicd, since it requires no graphical interface

thanks for the advice, summer vacation will be coming up, so I will have plenty of time

Kenarkies 06-16-2010 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LinkSlayer64 (Post 4004892)
and I can't even remember where I configured it, I know it was some file I edited, not using a program (besides nano)

Did you look back through the history command - it nearly always gives me the clues to what I did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LinkSlayer64 (Post 4004892)
I'll try using wicd, since it requires no graphical interface

wicd worked well for me until network manager started to work OOTB. NM now seems quite slick but used to be a bit of a dog while it was still being developed.

Ken

LinkSlayer64 06-17-2010 12:23 PM

Well, it's a text based system so I can't use NetworkManager,
However I just found out that livecd was 9.10, not 10.04, the disc was labeled wrong on me...so I fail.
in the mean time, I guess I'll just install 9.10 server edition side by side as dual boot. I just want one that works already.
edit, added "ubuntu-desktop" and well I don't know what part seems to help it keep working but well, I kinda like having a little gui to help me administer the thing anyway. does anyone know how I could lower my memory footprint besides changing the window manager? it would be appreciated

Kenarkies 06-18-2010 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LinkSlayer64 (Post 4006688)
Well, it's a text based system so I can't use NetworkManager,
However I just found out that livecd was 9.10, not 10.04, the disc was labeled wrong on me...so I fail.
in the mean time, I guess I'll just install 9.10 server edition side by side as dual boot. I just want one that works already.
edit, added "ubuntu-desktop" and well I don't know what part seems to help it keep working but well, I kinda like having a little gui to help me administer the thing anyway. does anyone know how I could lower my memory footprint besides changing the window manager? it would be appreciated

I'm rather at sea about what you are wanting to do. If you are running a minimal text-based system, is it that you have a server of some sort? Or do you have an old limited system that you are playing about with. Maybe there is another approach to what you want to do. Anyway WICD is probably the way to go for networking in a text-based system. If you want GUI management you can do so with a very minimal desktop such as XFCE which is a favourite of a lot of people, but I don't know about its memory footprint. An instance that I'm running on a Mythbuntu server shows about 512M in use, but that is running other applications (MythTV in this case). You can manage remotely through such things as VNC which will give you a desktop to work with but you will still need the desktop (and X) installed and running on the machine you are monitoring.

confidenceb 06-18-2010 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenarkies (Post 4007152)
I'm rather at sea about what you are wanting to do. If you are running a minimal text-based system, is it that you have a server of some sort? Or do you have an old limited system that you are playing about with. Maybe there is another approach to what you want to do. Anyway WICD is probably the way to go for networking in a text-based system. If you want GUI management you can do so with a very minimal desktop such as XFCE which is a favourite of a lot of people, but I don't know about its memory footprint. An instance that I'm running on a Mythbuntu server shows about 512M in use, but that is running other applications (MythTV in this case). You can manage remotely through such things as VNC which will give you a desktop to work with but you will still need the desktop (and X) installed and running on the machine you are monitoring.

sounds reasonable analisis


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:53 AM.