Signal quality problems w. DI-624+

I recently installed a WLAN router in my apartment for accessing the
Internet and sharing files between 3 PCs. For Security I have WPA-PSK
(highest standard this relatively old router allows) and a MAC address
filter activated. The whole setup worked fine for a couple of weeks,
but recently I've been getting really bad signal quality, causing the
network speed to drop down to 11Mbps (theoretically I should be at
54Mbit/s). I noticed that my WLAN Card on my PC can see multiple other
Access Points in the immediate area, so i changed the Wireless Channel
setting in my router to a channel that wasn't being used by one of the
other visible WLANs - which improved my speed for a while.
The last few days multiple new WLAN Sites have popped up (guess i know
what a couple of my neighbors got for Christmas ;-) ), and *boom* - my
signal quality droped.
Does anyone have any tips as what i can do to improve my WLAN signal
quality?

I'm using a D-Link DI-624+, Rev. A with the latest firmware found on
the D-Link website, my Pc has a cheepo Sitecom 54Mbit WLAN PCI card
with the newest Firmware and Drivers installed.

Thanks in advance,
Chris

reah23 wrote:

> I recently installed a WLAN router in my apartment for accessing the
> Internet and sharing files between 3 PCs. For Security I have WPA-PSK
> (highest standard this relatively old router allows) and a MAC address
> filter activated. The whole setup worked fine for a couple of weeks,
> but recently I've been getting really bad signal quality, causing the
> network speed to drop down to 11Mbps (theoretically I should be at
> 54Mbit/s). I noticed that my WLAN Card on my PC can see multiple
> other Access Points in the immediate area, so i changed the Wireless
> Channel setting in my router to a channel that wasn't being used by
> one of the other visible WLANs - which improved my speed for a while.
> The last few days multiple new WLAN Sites have popped up (guess i know
> what a couple of my neighbors got for Christmas ;-) ), and boom - my
> signal quality droped.
> Does anyone have any tips as what i can do to improve my WLAN signal
> quality?
>
> I'm using a D-Link DI-624+, Rev. A with the latest firmware found on
> the D-Link website, my Pc has a cheepo Sitecom 54Mbit WLAN PCI card
> with the newest Firmware and Drivers installed.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Chris

Try this

http://homepages.picknowl.com.au/glo...gnet/ant1.html

--

On 31 Dec 2006 04:18:03 -0800, "reah23" <chris.frech@arcor.de> wrote in
<1167567483.139183.198150@a3g2000cwd.googlegroups. com>:

>I recently installed a WLAN router in my apartment for accessing the
>Internet and sharing files between 3 PCs. For Security I have WPA-PSK
>(highest standard this relatively old router allows)

Good.

>and a MAC address
>filter activated.

Bad. Won't help, and all too often hurts.

>The whole setup worked fine for a couple of weeks,
>but recently I've been getting really bad signal quality,

Likely interference. See wikis below.

>causing the
>network speed to drop down to 11Mbps (theoretically I should be at
>54Mbit/s).

Only with no interference at relatively close range. Speed falls off
with distance and interference.

>I noticed that my WLAN Card on my PC can see multiple other
>Access Points in the immediate area,

Possible sources of interference, but there are lots of others.

>so i changed the Wireless Channel
>setting in my router to a channel that wasn't being used by one of the
>other visible WLANs - which improved my speed for a while.

Generally a good idea. Start with channels 1, 6, 11.

>The last few days multiple new WLAN Sites have popped up (guess i know
>what a couple of my neighbors got for Christmas ;-) ), and *boom* - my
>signal quality droped.

More interference.

>Does anyone have any tips as what i can do to improve my WLAN signal
>quality?

Directional antenna(s).
Change to 802.11a.

>I'm using a D-Link DI-624+, Rev. A with the latest firmware found on
>the D-Link website, my Pc has a cheepo Sitecom 54Mbit WLAN PCI card
>with the newest Firmware and Drivers installed.

Avoid cheepo products. I use and recommend Buffalo at the low end.

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

> >I recently installed a WLAN router in my apartment for accessing the
> >Internet and sharing files between 3 PCs. For Security I have WPA-PSK
> >(highest standard this relatively old router allows)
>
> Good.

Not really. WPA-PSK according to some is easier to break then WEP was.
WPA-EAS is much more secure.

Better off with a newer router and a RADIUS server.

The 624s are horrid anyway, I had one that would just stop routing
internet bound traffic through the wireless interface after it was on
for a few hours. A total piece of junk.

The 634M has proven a much better router.

"Andy" <ajj3085@alum.rit.edu> hath wroth:

>> >I recently installed a WLAN router in my apartment for accessing the
>> >Internet and sharing files between 3 PCs. For Security I have WPA-PSK
>> >(highest standard this relatively old router allows)
>>
>> Good.

>Not really. WPA-PSK according to some is easier to break then WEP was.

Reference please? I know that short WPA pass phrases can be cracked
with a brute force attack. Got a new exploit or cracking tool?

There's also a question of how much better WPA2 is over just WPA-PSK.
You can pile on as much additional security as one feels necessary
(e.g. VPN) but the initial step of using WPA with a greater than 20
char non-dictionary pass phrase will be more then adequate for most
users.

> WPA-EAS is much more secure.

Do you mean WPA-AES (which is the same as WPA2)?

>Better off with a newer router and a RADIUS server.

Sure. However, setting up a RADIUS server to deliver random WPA keys
for 3 machines is a bit of overkill. A reasonably convoluted WPA2
pass phrase will do just as well.

>The 624s are horrid anyway, I had one that would just stop routing
>internet bound traffic through the wireless interface after it was on
>for a few hours. A total piece of junk.

One of my customers had a similar problem. It seems that he had RIP2
enabled on his router. One of his machines was spewing some garbage
that the router interpreted at a RIP route update and would change the
default gateway setting in the router. It would show up on the status
page as garbage. The effect was similar to what you're seeing.

>The 634M has proven a much better router.

I couldn't find such a model number. There is a WGT634U model.
Thou shalt not abrev or trunc.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Andy" <ajj3085@alum.rit.edu> hath wroth:

>> >I recently installed a WLAN router in my apartment for accessing the
>> >Internet and sharing files between 3 PCs. For Security I have WPA-PSK
>> >(highest standard this relatively old router allows)
>>
>> Good.

>Not really. WPA-PSK according to some is easier to break then WEP was.

Reference please? I know that short WPA pass phrases can be cracked
with a brute force attack. Got a new exploit or cracking tool?

There's also a question of how much better WPA2 is over just WPA-PSK.
You can pile on as much additional security as one feels necessary
(e.g. VPN) but the initial step of using WPA with a greater than 20
char non-dictionary pass phrase will be more then adequate for most
users.

> WPA-EAS is much more secure.

Do you mean WPA-AES (which is the same as WPA2)?

>Better off with a newer router and a RADIUS server.

Sure. However, setting up a RADIUS server to deliver random WPA keys
for 3 machines is a bit of overkill. A reasonably convoluted WPA2 pass
phrase will do just as well.

>The 624s are horrid anyway, I had one that would just stop routing
>internet bound traffic through the wireless interface after it was on
>for a few hours. A total piece of junk.

One of my customers had a similar problem. It seems that he had RIP2
enabled on his router. One of his machines was spewing some garbage
that the router interpreted at a RIP route update and would change the
default gateway setting in the router. It would show up on the status
page as garbage. The effect was similar to what you're seeing.

>The 634M has proven a much better router.

I couldn't find such a model number. There is a WGT634U model.
Thou shalt not abrev or trunc.