On Monday 18 December 2006 03:05, Damien Miller wrote:
> Knowing the MAC and RF versions of the affected cards is irrelevant?
Yes.
> I guess ral(4) that works fine over 20m through several double-brick
> walls is a figment of my imagination then...
No.
A sensitive ral radio would be.
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, pedro la peu wrote:
> On Friday 15 December 2006 09:51, you wrote:
> > So far for all you people who have complained about lousy ral(4)
> > range or reception, only one of you has posted a dmesg (and even it was
> > incomplete) and none of you have posted your interface config
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 02:02:00AM +, pedro la peu wrote:
> > Don't let this interrupt your complain-fest, but if you want to move
> > beyond whinging and start trying to figure out what the bad performing
> > cards have in common then you know what you have to do...
>
> Don't let this interru
On Friday 15 December 2006 09:51, you wrote:
> So far for all you people who have complained about lousy ral(4)
> range or reception, only one of you has posted a dmesg (and even it was
> incomplete) and none of you have posted your interface config.
Irrelevant.
> Don't let this interrupt your co
On 12/16/06, Jonathan Gray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 04:14:14PM +0800, Sepherosa Ziehau wrote:
> On 12/14/06, earx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >ralink is the worst radio chipset in term of radio performance
> >but the best documented for driver :(
>
> I probably missed s
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 04:14:14PM +0800, Sepherosa Ziehau wrote:
> On 12/14/06, earx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >ralink is the worst radio chipset in term of radio performance
> >but the best documented for driver :(
>
> I probably missed something here, except for some Linux drivers, I
> didn'
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 08:51:33PM +1100, Damien Miller wrote:
> So far for all you people who have complained about lousy ral(4)
> range or reception, only one of you has posted a dmesg (and even it was
> incomplete) and none of you have posted your interface config.
>
> Don't let this interrupt y
Damien, no problem, thanks for your help ! Thomas
complete dmesg
OpenBSD 4.0 (GENERIC) #1107: Sat Sep 16 19:15:58 MDT 2006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/arch/i386/compile/GENERIC
cpu0: Intel(R) Celeron(R) M processor 800MHz ("GenuineIntel" 686-class, 0KB L2
zcpu0:
FPU,V86,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PA
So far for all you people who have complained about lousy ral(4)
range or reception, only one of you has posted a dmesg (and even it was
incomplete) and none of you have posted your interface config.
Don't let this interrupt your complain-fest, but if you want to move
beyond whinging and start try
On 12/14/06, earx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ralink is the worst radio chipset in term of radio performance
but the best documented for driver :(
I probably missed something here, except for some Linux drivers, I
didn't remember Ralink had released any formal documents about its
MACs and RFs.
I have experienced the same problems with both ath(4) and ral(4) (minipci
cards). I tried to use different modes (B & G) and different settings
(channels, ..) and using an external antenna but the performance's still
lossy :-/
for ral(4): g mode doesn't work very well for me (packet loss, ...) so i
http://www.netgate.com/info/miniPCI/2511MPPLUS/2511MP_PLUS_Spec.pdf
Receive sensitivity: -89dBm to -91dBm.
http://soekris.kd85.com/pdf/ralabg.pdf
Receive sensitivity: -70dBm to -84dBm.
I have had similar experiences using ral in 802.11b mode.
Forcing 802.11G mode seems to help alot.
Could people in this thread please mention whether they are using ral in
b or g mode ?
--
Mathieu Sauve-Frankel
Jeff Quast wrote:
On 12/14/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 12 December 2006 13:27, Anis Kadri wrote:
> On 12/12/06, Clint Pachl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 12/9/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> 1 prism and 1 ral -> bad performance
> >
On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 01:27:19PM +0100, Anis Kadri wrote:
> Same problem with minipci ral cards
> max distance: 5-8m.
>
About the same here.
2-3m meters the signal strength is ok
3-6m its a good day if I can connect
6- no connection can be made what so ever
The signal strength(if one can ca
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 08:12:49 +1100 (EST), Damien Miller wrote:
>On Tue, 12 Dec 2006, Clint Pachl wrote:
>
>> I have a similar problem in 3.9 with ral cards; very poor range.
>>
>> Linksys (ath) [ap] -> Level One (ral) = 5-7 meters
>> Linksys (ath) [ap] -> Old 1MBit Intel (wi?) = +30 meters
>> Lev
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006, Clint Pachl wrote:
> I have a similar problem in 3.9 with ral cards; very poor range.
>
> Linksys (ath) [ap] -> Level One (ral) = 5-7 meters
> Linksys (ath) [ap] -> Old 1MBit Intel (wi?) = +30 meters
> Level One (ral pci) [ap] -> Level One (ral pccard) = must be within 1-2
>
Ralink is certainly not the best radio chipset out there but
it can handle more than 5-8 meters.
I suggest you try the version in -current.
I replaced the rate control algorithm (which was not very
efficient) by a new one. You may also try setting a fixed
rate to see if it changes something.
Damie
It's a known problem with ralink. Bad radio.
2006/12/12, Clint Pachl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Anton Karpov wrote:
> > It's a known problem with ralink. Bad radio.
>
> That's what I was thinking.
>
> Hey, could you recommend a good "range" card?
I have Proxim Orinoco Gold 8470, works fine for me. But it's fucking ath(4)
. I suppose the best
On 12/14/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 12 December 2006 13:27, Anis Kadri wrote:
> On 12/12/06, Clint Pachl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 12/9/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> 1 prism and 1 ral -> bad performance
> > >> 2 ral -> no con
> I just found a Proxim Gold 8470-FC card on eBay for $60 w/ shipping. Is
> this a good deal? Is your card "8470-FC"?
>
> Thanks for the info.
>
Yeah, but mine is not FC but WD.
it's not a pigtail problem, as i wrote that a always used prism cards
and it works. the resistor value of the pigtail is ok.
On Thursday 14 December 2006 12:45, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2006/12/14 12:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > it seems nobody uses minipci ralink cards ... :-(
>
> try dif
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 12:08:00 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
it seems nobody uses minipci ralink cards ... :-(
I also have a ralink card (regular PCI used in a Soekris with OBSD 4.0),
and I am experiencing similar problems - horribly low radio performace
over short dist
Le Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:45:37 +
Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a pris sa plume:
>
> On 2006/12/14 12:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > it seems nobody uses minipci ralink cards ... :-(
ralink is the worst radio chipset in term of radio performance
but the best documented for driver :(
r
On 2006/12/14 12:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> it seems nobody uses minipci ralink cards ... :-(
try different pigtails if possible. I've had very poor signal
strength in a soekris with a couple of different pigtails with
both ral(4) and ath(4) whereas the same cards in a thinkpad
did work ok. (s
it seems nobody uses minipci ralink cards ... :-(
On Tuesday 12 December 2006 13:27, Anis Kadri wrote:
> Same problem with minipci ral cards
> max distance: 5-8m.
>
> On 12/12/06, Clint Pachl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
> > > I have a Linksys card that uses ral and I can
Same problem with minipci ral cards
max distance: 5-8m.
On 12/12/06, Clint Pachl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
> > I have a Linksys card that uses ral and I can confirm this
> >
> >
> > Sam Fourman Jr.
> >
> > On 12/9/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Hi
Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
I have a Linksys card that uses ral and I can confirm this
Sam Fourman Jr.
On 12/9/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi List,
i've tried today openbsd 4.0
with several cards:
rt2561t -> PC-620C
rt2560f -> WMIR-103G
rt2560f -> GN-WIKG
with all cards i
I have a Linksys card that uses ral and I can confirm this
Sam Fourman Jr.
On 12/9/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi List,
i've tried today openbsd 4.0
with several cards:
rt2561t -> PC-620C
rt2560f -> WMIR-103G
rt2560f -> GN-WIKG
with all cards i got a connection (mediao
Hi List,
i've tried today openbsd 4.0
with several cards:
rt2561t -> PC-620C
rt2560f -> WMIR-103G
rt2560f -> GN-WIKG
with all cards i got a connection (mediaopt ibss -> adhoc)
with a distance of some meters. but if i tried a distance of 150 meters
with 2 yagi (12dbi) i got no connection :-(. i
31 matches
Mail list logo
