[Gllug] Assessing WLAN capabilities

[David L Neil]

Hi Rich,

Richard Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 08:45:05PM +1200, DL Neil wrote:
>> Taking a step back from there, how can I tell that a machine will only 
>> run 802.11B cf B and G? (without opening-up the box, if then)
> 
> /sbin/lspci
> For example on a relatively old Lenovo / Thinkpad:
> # /sbin/lspci | grep -i network
> 03:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation PRO/Wireless 3945ABG [Golan] Network Connection (rev 02)

lspci | grep net -i
01:05.0 Network controller: Intersil Corporation Prism 2.5 Wavelan 
chipset (rev 01)
01:08.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82801CAM (ICH3) PRO/100 
VE (LOM) Ethernet Controller (rev 42)

Had worked out the Prism chip-set and thus an Orinoco driver, but that 
didn't seem to be a path that would take me further because the driver 
runs a number of chip-sets and/or h/w configs...


> Other information is available from iwconfig:
> # /sbin/iwconfig wlan0
> wlan0     IEEE 802.11abg  Mode:Managed  Access Point: Not-Associated   
>           Tx-Power=15 dBm   
>           Retry  long limit:7   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off
>           Encryption key:off
>           Power Management:off

iwconfig eth1
eth1      IEEE 802.11b  ESSID:"flyingbrotherorks" 
Nickname:"Jr-Brown.brothers"
           Mode:Managed  Frequency:2.452 Hz  Access Point: 
E8:39:DF:13:01:42
           Bit Rate:11 Mb/s   Sensitivity=1/3
           Retry min limit:8   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off
           Encryption key:off
           Power Management:off
           Link Quality=16/70  Signal level=-79 dBm  Noise level=-96 dBm
           Rx invalid nwid:0  Rx invalid crypt:0  Rx invalid frag:0
           Tx excessive retries:0  Invalid misc:2   Missed beacon:0

=I looked at this but was not able to discern if the "IEEE 802.11b" was 
a limitation of the device, or simply the negotiated connection - as you 
can see from the Link Quality stats, etc, the link spans the length and 
breadth of the house (and hence my attempting to put in 'upgraded' 
wireless - maybe a wireless bridge even, because even my preference for 
'wired' wavers at the size of the task that would entail...).


=as a matter of interest, why does the system also report?
iwconfig wifi0
wifi0     IEEE 802.11b  ESSID:"flyingbrotherorks" 
Nickname:"Jr-Brown.brothers"
           Mode:Managed  Frequency:2.452 GHz  Access Point: 
E8:39:DF:13:01:42
           Bit Rate:11 Mb/s   Sensitivity=1/3
           Retry min limit:8   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off
           Encryption key:off
           Power Management:off


> Not sure about whether it supports WPA.  I thought basically
> everything has supported this for a few years (although at home I used
> to use a basic WEP network because I had a few very old things which
> didn't support WPA).

=yes, I suspect that if I make this machine wired/eth0-only (its battery 
is such that I'm basically mains-only anyway), I can considerably harden 
the wireless security.

=it's even worse for my model because not only does the IBM parts list 
show that there were a number of different wireless devices/choices, web 
pages further reveal that there were some model-variants that didn't 
have any wireless i/f at all...

=So wading through all that and then trying to work out which, if any, 
variants support which facilities is just a dead loss (in my humble 
experience). There must be a better way!?


=IBM were even worse. The engineer spoken-to reckoned that it wasn't 
worth investing any of his time in the question, having first wasted his 
(and my) time working out that the ROI of such an aged PC was down to 
single digit pounds per month. So I was left gold-fishing slightly: 
firstly that I'd managed to keep the poor, old thing going for so long 
after it should have been put out to pasture (by 'their rules'), and 
secondly that 'expended ROI' was a justification for saying "go away"! 
(or perhaps "it is beneath me"?)


> Rich.

=Many thanks,
=dn

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug