wireless regular loses connectivity

I would like some suggestions on tracking down/debugging the following
problem. Thanks.

--

I have the following setup.

In the "office" (on 2nd floor):
A cable modem that talks to Charter Communications.
A linksys WRT54G router.
Four machines that are plugged directly into the wired ports
of the router:
1 is a desktop
3 are thinkpad laptops in docking stations,
that also have builtin wireless cards
(the wireless cards are probably all turned on)

In various rooms on the first floor,
I have the following items all wireless:
Two Tivos using Tivo wireless adapters (a series 2, and a humax)
another laptop (a Dell with a pcmcia wireless adapter)
and occassionally one of the thinkpads from the office
is also wireless downstairs

I also have about 5 or 6 neighbors that also have wireless setups
(although only two of them get even "two bars" (I don't know nor
specifically care what units those bars are displayed in) worth of
signal strength and both those are secured as mine is, so I assume
that we haven't picked the same channel as except during the problem
times I get reasonable throughput).

Also, I have some 2.4 Ghz phones, although they are not in use at the
times I encounter the problem.

The setup mostly works ok, except that sometimes on regular intervals
the wireless connection gets lost. That is, on some days, but not
everyday (or not necessarily even once every week, although generally
at least once per week), I get into a situation where the wireless
connection seems to work for some period then lose connectivity, and
then work again for a similar period, and lose connectivity. I've not
timed the intervals, but they could be as short as 1 minute at a time,
but 5 minute intervals seem more likely. The intervals may not be the
same each time either, and sometimes it seems worse than others.

Note that I'm not absolutely certain that it is the wireless that is
losing connectivity. The symptom I'm certain that occurs, is that my
RDP connection via VPN over the internet to my desktop at work loses
connectivity. It is generally not bad enough that I completely lose
the circuit, but it does "hang up" such that I lose typing (and
redisplay) and have to minimize the session and then restore it (and
the icon that shows the connection is lost flashes during that time).

Most of the connectivity outages are relatively short, say 15-30
seconds, just long enough to interrupt my typing. Aside from this
loss of connectivity, the network seems to be fine, e.g. I can get
moderate sized files (unless the file size causes the download to
cross the loss of connectivity) off the internet without delay at
comparable rates to lan transfers at work.

Again, thanks for reading!
-Chris

On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 12:27:12 -0400, Chris F Clark
<cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in
<sddhcsp3y8v.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>:

>I would like some suggestions on tracking down/debugging the following
>problem. Thanks.

>I have the following setup.
>
>In the "office" (on 2nd floor):
> A cable modem that talks to Charter Communications.
> A linksys WRT54G router.
> Four machines that are plugged directly into the wired ports
> of the router:
> 1 is a desktop
> 3 are thinkpad laptops in docking stations,
> that also have builtin wireless cards
> (the wireless cards are probably all turned on)
>
>In various rooms on the first floor,
>I have the following items all wireless:
> Two Tivos using Tivo wireless adapters (a series 2, and a humax)
> another laptop (a Dell with a pcmcia wireless adapter)
> and occassionally one of the thinkpads from the office
> is also wireless downstairs
>
>I also have about 5 or 6 neighbors that also have wireless setups
>(although only two of them get even "two bars" (I don't know nor
>specifically care what units those bars are displayed in) worth of
>signal strength and both those are secured as mine is, so I assume
>that we haven't picked the same channel as except during the problem
>times I get reasonable throughput).

Make sure your own SSID is _unique_ (different from anyone else in the
world, especially your neighbors).

>Also, I have some 2.4 Ghz phones, although they are not in use at the
>times I encounter the problem.

They may nonetheless cause problems! Likewise the many other sources of
2.4 GHz interference (e.g., microwave ovens).

>The setup mostly works ok, except that sometimes on regular intervals
>the wireless connection gets lost. That is, on some days, but not
>everyday (or not necessarily even once every week, although generally
>at least once per week), I get into a situation where the wireless
>connection seems to work for some period then lose connectivity, and
>then work again for a similar period, and lose connectivity. I've not
>timed the intervals, but they could be as short as 1 minute at a time,
>but 5 minute intervals seem more likely. The intervals may not be the
>same each time either, and sometimes it seems worse than others.

What are the _exact_ symptoms? Does the icon in the System Tray change?
I have no idea what you mean by "gets lost" and "lose connectivity".

>Note that I'm not absolutely certain that it is the wireless that is
>losing connectivity. The symptom I'm certain that occurs, is that my
>RDP connection via VPN over the internet to my desktop at work loses
>connectivity. It is generally not bad enough that I completely lose
>the circuit, but it does "hang up" such that I lose typing (and
>redisplay) and have to minimize the session and then restore it (and
>the icon that shows the connection is lost flashes during that time).
>
>Most of the connectivity outages are relatively short, say 15-30
>seconds, just long enough to interrupt my typing. Aside from this
>loss of connectivity, the network seems to be fine, e.g. I can get
>moderate sized files (unless the file size causes the download to
>cross the loss of connectivity) off the internet without delay at
>comparable rates to lan transfers at work.

Sounds like weak signal and/or interference. You may need better
(directional) antennas -- wireless signals have trouble penetrating
walls, floors and ceilings.

--
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>

John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> writes:

> Make sure your own SSID is _unique_ (different from anyone else in the
> world, especially your neighbors).

I believe my ssid is unique in the world, given that it is a rather
odd one. The ssid's I see for my neighbors are distinct both from mine
and each other.

> They may nonetheless cause problems! Likewise the many other sources of
> 2.4 GHz interference (e.g., microwave ovens).

I'm pretty certain that no one was using neither the microwave nor the
phones in our house at the times I was experiencing problems. Now,
would the phones, even when not in use, send out some sort of
broadcast message. The regularity of the lossages suggest some sort
of automatic and timed event. Like someone sending out a "I'm here"
(icmp) packet.

> What are the _exact_ symptoms? Does the icon in the System Tray change?
> I have no idea what you mean by "gets lost" and "lose connectivity".

The exact symptoms are a loss of VPN connectivity. I don't recall any
icons in the system tray changing. However, some percentage of time,
when the problem "fixes itself", I get one of those "balloon boxes" in
the system tray that says, "Connected to <ssid>, strength: excellent".

> Sounds like weak signal and/or interference. You may need better
> (directional) antennas -- wireless signals have trouble penetrating
> walls, floors and ceilings.

I doubt weak signal, since I was within 1-3 meters from the router
(i.e. in the same 9x12 room, close enough for a medium length cat5
cable to reach) the last time I was experiencing the problem, and
after reconnecting, the stats show: signal strength excellent (and the
maximum "4 bars").

Interference I can't rule out. I have no idea the source though, nor
how to track it down. I also feel like it could be some kind of
collision/packet overload problem. That seems real likely to me.
However, I have no clue how to track that down either.

Thanks for response,
-Chris

On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 09:57:18 -0400, Chris F Clark
<cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in
<sddslc80vy9.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>:

>John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> writes:

>> They may nonetheless cause problems! Likewise the many other sources of
>> 2.4 GHz interference (e.g., microwave ovens).
>
>I'm pretty certain that no one was using neither the microwave nor the
>phones in our house at the times I was experiencing problems.

How about your neighbors? How about other sources of interference?

>Now,
>would the phones, even when not in use, send out some sort of
>broadcast message. The regularity of the lossages suggest some sort
>of automatic and timed event. Like someone sending out a "I'm here"
>(icmp) packet.

Certain cordless phones do indeed chatter periodically when not in use.

>> What are the _exact_ symptoms? Does the icon in the System Tray change?
>> I have no idea what you mean by "gets lost" and "lose connectivity".
>
>The exact symptoms are a loss of VPN connectivity. I don't recall any
>icons in the system tray changing. However, some percentage of time,
>when the problem "fixes itself", I get one of those "balloon boxes" in
>the system tray that says, "Connected to <ssid>, strength: excellent".

It would be really helpful to get the exact symptoms when you experience
a loss of VPN connectivity. Try pinging one of your DNS servers outside
the VPN tunnel. Try running "IPCONFIG /ALL" in a command window. Post
the exact output from both here.

>> Sounds like weak signal and/or interference. You may need better
>> (directional) antennas -- wireless signals have trouble penetrating
>> walls, floors and ceilings.
>
>I doubt weak signal, since I was within 1-3 meters from the router
>(i.e. in the same 9x12 room, close enough for a medium length cat5
>cable to reach) the last time I was experiencing the problem, and
>after reconnecting, the stats show: signal strength excellent (and the
>maximum "4 bars").

Then something else is probably going on; e.g., DHCP lease renewal
problem.

>Interference I can't rule out. I have no idea the source though, nor
>how to track it down. I also feel like it could be some kind of
>collision/packet overload problem. That seems real likely to me.
>However, I have no clue how to track that down either.

I seriously doubt that. Check your router log for errors.

--
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>

First, thanks for the advice on exactly what documentation will help
locate the problem. This is exactly what I was looking for.

John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> writes:
> It would be really helpful to get the exact symptoms when you experience
> a loss of VPN connectivity. Try pinging one of your DNS servers outside
> the VPN tunnel. Try running "IPCONFIG /ALL" in a command window. Post
> the exact output from both here.

I'm not sure of an IP address of a DNS server
outside the VPN tunnel. The only addresses outside the tunnel I know
it allows me to access are 192.168 (e.g. my local lan) and from what
I've seen all the (wireless) devices hang up together. I guess I
could ping the hardwired desktop machine. Presuming I have it turned
on, as I recently have not by powering it on at all, living solely on
laptops.

The ipconfig output should be easier to get. Do I need to anonymize
any of it? Are there any addresses that posting will help promote a
security breach?

> Then something else is probably going on; e.g., DHCP lease renewal
> problem.
>
>>Interference I can't rule out. I have no idea the source though, nor
>>how to track it down. I also feel like it could be some kind of
>>collision/packet overload problem. That seems real likely to me.
>>However, I have no clue how to track that down either.
>
> I seriously doubt that. Check your router log for errors.

Ok, I'll have to investigate how to do that. I essentially run the
router in configure and forget mode. I know I used a web interface to
initially configure the router, but haven't used that in some time
(e.g. possibly weeks or months).

Is interference likely to show up in the log in some fashion?

Again, thanks.
-Chris

On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:35:41 -0400, Chris F Clark
<cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in
<sddlkhz25yq.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>:

>First, thanks for the advice on exactly what documentation will help
>locate the problem. This is exactly what I was looking for.
>
>John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> writes:
>> It would be really helpful to get the exact symptoms when you experience
>> a loss of VPN connectivity. Try pinging one of your DNS servers outside
>> the VPN tunnel. Try running "IPCONFIG /ALL" in a command window. Post
>> the exact output from both here.
>
>I'm not sure of an IP address of a DNS server
>outside the VPN tunnel. The only addresses outside the tunnel I know
>it allows me to access are 192.168 (e.g. my local lan) and from what
>I've seen all the (wireless) devices hang up together. ...

IPCONFIG/ALL would have given you the DNS servers, not to mention giving
me more to go on. Please do that before posting anything more.

>The ipconfig output should be easier to get. Do I need to anonymize
>any of it? Are there any addresses that posting will help promote a
>security breach?

There should be no real security issue. (The only possible issue would
be your IP address if it's static and not otherwise disclosed, but even
that isn't a significant issue if you are properly firewalled,
especially since you are using VPN.) Here's my current output:

| >IPCONFIG /ALL
|
| Windows IP Configuration
|
| Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : JTPT41
| Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : navasgroup.com
| Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Hybrid
| IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
| WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
| DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : navasgroup.com
|
| Ethernet adapter Wireless Network Connection:
|
| Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
| Description . . . . . . . . . . . : 11b/g Wireless LAN Mini PCI Adapter
| Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-0E-9B-A3-7B-51
| Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
| Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
| IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.193.0.129
| Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
| Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 10.193.0.1
| DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.193.0.1
| DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 207.77.152.2
| 168.215.210.50
| Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Wednesday, March 14, 2007 11:35:21
| Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Wednesday, March 14, 2007 12:35:21
|
| Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:
|
| Media State . . . . . . . . . . . : Media disconnected
| Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/1000 MT Mobile Connection
| Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-0D-60-11-B6-FA

Note the DNS server addresses.

>> Then something else is probably going on; e.g., DHCP lease renewal
>> problem.
>>
>>>Interference I can't rule out. I have no idea the source though, nor
>>>how to track it down. I also feel like it could be some kind of
>>>collision/packet overload problem. That seems real likely to me.
>>>However, I have no clue how to track that down either.
>>
>> I seriously doubt that. Check your router log for errors.
>
>Ok, I'll have to investigate how to do that. I essentially run the
>router in configure and forget mode.

You're now in troubleshooting mode.

>I know I used a web interface to
>initially configure the router, but haven't used that in some time
>(e.g. possibly weeks or months).
>
>Is interference likely to show up in the log in some fashion?

The _problem_ is likely to show up in the log.

--
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>

Well, this is interesting. I've seen the output of ipconfig before and
I know this is NOT the expected output. And, it's particularly
surprising, since at the moment I am NOT having a problem with my
wireless connection. I then called up the wireless access connections
and it gives the information below.

ipconfig /all

Windows IP Configuration

An internal error occurred: A device attached to the system is not functioning.

Please contact Microsoft Product Support Services for further help.

Additional information: Unknown media status code.

================================================== ======================

Wireless Access Connections brings up a screen that reports:

Connection status: Associated with access point

Signal Strength: 91%

Signal quality: Excellent

Transmit rate: 54.0 Mbps

Associated MAC address: 00:13:10:73:92:F6

Current channel: 0

Current location profile: home

Network name (SSID): chris.net

Network type: Access point (Infrastructure)

Security encription: Configured by Windows

Description: 11a/b/g Wireless LAN Mini PCI Adapter

MAC Address: 00:05:4E:51:16:9D

Firmware version: N/A

Driver version: 4.1.0

================================================== ======================

I'm not certain what information to get next.

On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 21:59:02 -0400, Chris F Clark
<cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in
<sddd53b1d3t.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>:

>Well, this is interesting. I've seen the output of ipconfig before and
>I know this is NOT the expected output. And, it's particularly
>surprising, since at the moment I am NOT having a problem with my
>wireless connection. I then called up the wireless access connections
>and it gives the information below.
>
>ipconfig /all
>
>Windows IP Configuration
>An internal error occurred: A device attached to the system is not functioning.
>Please contact Microsoft Product Support Services for further help.
>Additional information: Unknown media status code.

This is a known problem to which I've posted work-arounds -- see
<http://groups.google.com/group/alt.internet.wireless/browse_frm/thread/1f5b6a321fd8ef35>

--
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>

Note: Nothing is this email should be construed as coming from Intel
or as any kind of official announcement or committment. They are
simply the private opinions of the author.

John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> writes:

> On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 21:59:02 -0400, Chris F Clark
> <cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in
> <sddd53b1d3t.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>:
>
>>Well, this is interesting. I've seen the output of ipconfig before and
>>I know this is NOT the expected output. And, it's particularly
>>surprising, since at the moment I am NOT having a problem with my
>>wireless connection. I then called up the wireless access connections
>>and it gives the information below.
>>
>>ipconfig /all
>>
>>Windows IP Configuration
>>An internal error occurred: A device attached to the system is not functioning.
>>Please contact Microsoft Product Support Services for further help.
>>Additional information: Unknown media status code.
>
> This is a known problem to which I've posted work-arounds -- see
> <http://groups.google.com/group/alt.internet.wireless/browse_frm/thread/1f5b6a321fd8ef35>
>
> --
> 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>

The workarounds are problematic. I work for Intel and this laptop
(and the software on it) is managed by Intel's IT department. The
corporate security policy is that we need to use Thinkpad access
connections (and Intel PROSet) on our laptops. In fact, they take a
very dim view of us reinstalling or rolling-back any drivers on our
systems. They don't even let us use Windows Update, since it might
introduce patches that "they" (the corporate IT department) haven't
"verified".

Thus, you've just turned a technical problem into a political one for
me--how to "fix" my machine without breaking my conditions of
employment.

Are there any "current" drivers which work? If not, what is the "most
current" driver that works? I will need to call IT and get permission
to install them, but there is a chance for that to be allowed,
particularly if it is a current driver (and not an older one).

The machine in question is a thinkpad T42p (and the wireless card, is
that standard one that IBM built into such units).

However, if the problem is just ipconfig not working (e.g. not
displaying the information). Is there another workaround possible?
Can I get the relevant information another way?

As I said, using access connections I get a connection and within that
program I can see the various addresses (well, I didn't find the DNS
server addresses, but I did find the addresses I previously
displayed). Moreover, I *always* use access connections, someone
(IBM? the IT department?) built turning it on into the laptop boot
procedure--access conections (and perhaps a new driver) was part of a
recent patch applied to the machine (automatically, by the IT program
that keeps our machines "in spec").

Therefore, I don't care very much if ipconfig is broken, except as it
relates to tracking down the mysterious problem of sometimes losing
connectivity, which if I recall correctly predates ipconfig being
broken (as I knew it worked at one time, since I used to use a perl
script that ran ipconfig and grepped the address to determine whether
my laptop was at home or at work).

On a related note, if there is some problem with the drivers, and you
have information that I should pass along, I can see if I can do
that--I don't know if I will be able to find the right people to pass
it along to, but I will try. We do try to "eat our own dog food" and
thus force ourselves to fix the problems that we have created.

Thanks,
-Chris

Note: Nothing is this email should be construed as coming from Intel
or as any kind of official announcement or committment. They are
simply the private opinions of the author.

Chris F Clark <cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> writes:

> The workarounds are problematic. I work for Intel and this laptop
> (and the software on it) is managed by Intel's IT department.

Then make it their problem. Your employer is paying these clowns to
solve problems.

> Thus, you've just turned a technical problem into a political one for
> me--how to "fix" my machine without breaking my conditions of
> employment.

Um... how bout engaging that IT department whose responsibility it is
for ensuring you have a functioning laptop?

> However, if the problem is just ipconfig not working (e.g. not
> displaying the information). Is there another workaround possible?
> Can I get the relevant information another way?

John's a helpful kinda guy. If you think he's holding onto alternate
workaround info and nost posting it to the FAQ just to spite Intel
employees, well...

> Therefore, I don't care very much if ipconfig is broken,

Suddenly you sound like an immense pain in the ass that I'm personally
not that interested in helping.

Open an helpdesk ticket with your IT department. If their policies
prevent you from working around the issue, then a fix needs to come
from them. If your it department is as clueful as the one I have to
use on similar issues, I bid you good luck.

Best Regards,
--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 11:29:16 -0400, Chris F Clark
<cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in
<sddveh2zfsj.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>:

>>>ipconfig /all
>>>
>>>Windows IP Configuration
>>>An internal error occurred: A device attached to the system is not functioning.
>>>Please contact Microsoft Product Support Services for further help.
>>>Additional information: Unknown media status code.
>>
>> This is a known problem to which I've posted work-arounds -- see
>> <http://groups.google.com/group/alt.internet.wireless/browse_frm/thread/1f5b6a321fd8ef35>

>The workarounds are problematic. I work for Intel and this laptop
>(and the software on it) is managed by Intel's IT department. The
>corporate security policy is that we need to use Thinkpad access
>connections (and Intel PROSet) on our laptops. In fact, they take a
>very dim view of us reinstalling or rolling-back any drivers on our
>systems. They don't even let us use Windows Update, since it might
>introduce patches that "they" (the corporate IT department) haven't
>"verified".

This is covered in the thread I referred you to. My work-arounds (as
distinct from my fix) _don't_ require messing with the driver. Among
other things, you can simply disable and re-enable the device in
hardware manager to run IPCONFIG -- just do it before the auto-disable
kicks back in.

>Thus, you've just turned a technical problem into a political one for
>me--how to "fix" my machine without breaking my conditions of
>employment.

How about encouraging the folks in your company to fix their driver
problem? Trying to get them to take notice of this issue has been
futile and frustrating for me -- your company seems uninterested in bug
reports to the point of making it very difficult to submit them
(reminding me of former arrogance I thought it had put behind it).

>Are there any "current" drivers which work? If not, what is the "most
>current" driver that works? I will need to call IT and get permission
>to install them, but there is a chance for that to be allowed,
>particularly if it is a current driver (and not an older one).

This is also covered in the thread I referred you to. The problem seems
to have been introduced in Version 8 drivers, so any prior Version
should do.

>The machine in question is a thinkpad T42p (and the wireless card, is
>that standard one that IBM built into such units).

The IPCONFIG problem comes from the _wired_ adapter. This is also
covered in the thread I referred you to.

>However, if the problem is just ipconfig not working (e.g. not
>displaying the information). Is there another workaround possible?
>Can I get the relevant information another way?

Again, this is covered in the thread I referred you to. Use one of my
work-arounds.

>Therefore, I don't care very much if ipconfig is broken, except as it
>relates to tracking down the mysterious problem of sometimes losing
>connectivity, ...

And that's the point.

Once you've got IPCONFIG working, also try the script at
<http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/FixDHCP_script>.

>On a related note, if there is some problem with the drivers, and you
>have information that I should pass along, I can see if I can do
>that--I don't know if I will be able to find the right people to pass
>it along to, but I will try. We do try to "eat our own dog food" and
>thus force ourselves to fix the problems that we have created.

I'd be happy to do that myself if you can give me some idea of who to
contact or otherwise how to go about it. Try to find out who is
responsible for (cares about) your wired Ethernet chipset drivers.

--
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>

> This is covered in the thread I referred you to. My work-arounds (as
> distinct from my fix) _don't_ require messing with the driver. Among
> other things, you can simply disable and re-enable the device in
> hardware manager to run IPCONFIG -- just do it before the auto-disable
> kicks back in.

Ok, sorry, maybe I didn't read enough of the thread. When I used
google to view the thread, it only showed me three postings, and they
seemded all to be about rolling back the driver. I will go and look
again.

> How about encouraging the folks in your company to fix their driver
> problem? Trying to get them to take notice of this issue has been
> futile and frustrating for me -- your company seems uninterested in bug
> reports to the point of making it very difficult to submit them
> (reminding me of former arrogance I thought it had put behind it).

Yes, this seems like the right solution long term. I will try to find
you the right people to get the bug report noticed. I don't know if I
will have any better luck getting them to notice, but I will try.

-Chris

comphelp@toddh.net (Todd H.) writes

> Chris F Clark <cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> writes: (me >>)

>> However, if the problem is just ipconfig not working (e.g. not
>> displaying the information). Is there another workaround possible?
>> Can I get the relevant information another way?
>
> John's a helpful kinda guy. If you think he's holding onto alternate
> workaround info and nost posting it to the FAQ just to spite Intel
> employees, well...

Agreed. John is a helpful guy. And apparently, there was more to the
referenced thread than I found on Google by following the link. I
don't think he was intentionally hiding something from me (or Intel
employees or anyone else for that matter--doing so makes little
sense). However, I didn't see that additional information and wrongly
assumed that it wasn't there. That was my error. I will look again.

>> The workarounds are problematic. I work for Intel and this laptop
>> (and the software on it) is managed by Intel's IT department.
>
> Then make it their problem. Your employer is paying these clowns to
> solve problems.

I would love to make it IT's problem. However, the reality of big
company politics is that these guys aren't getting paid to solve
problems, they're paid to enforce rules, rules that they write for
their own convenience.

Thus, whether my home network is convenient for me to work at home is
not something they care very much about (as a group--I can often find
sympathetic members of the group that are helpful). As a comparative
example, it took six weeks (and numerous interventions by my
management) to get a version of vtune (an Intel developed product)
installed on a linux system, so that I could do measurements of
performance of a specific application I was tasked by my management to
investigate (for a "high priority" project), because the request was
not a "standard" one and the IT guy who was assigned that
responsibility hid behind the regulations rather than simply running
the script (which took me all of 5 minutes to do on my home linux
system--it didn't take him significantly longer than that). Thus, you
might excuse the fact, that I don't think making it IT's problem is
going to get my issue resolved.

I don't expect any of the IP guys to come out and diagnose my home
network and its interference problem. Nor, do I expect John or you to
do so either. However, I don't know how to diagnose interference
problems. Moreover, if this problem is an interference problem, as
John suggested, then whether my laptop runs ipconfig or not, may or
may not be relevant to the interference. I presume the interference
isn't coming from ipconfg, which is why I asked if there was another
way to get the relevant information, so that I wouldn't be stuck
waiting for ipconfig to get fixed. However, it appears that I simply
missed some of the thread which would have contained relevant
information, and that is my fault.

Therefore, I am going to try to figure out who needs to be prodded to
get the wired ethernet drivers fixed. I'm going to do that, because
it is the right thing to do.

In the meantime, I have investigated and I am running version 8.0.57.0
of the wired ethernet adapters. Moreover, ipconfig does work when I
first boot the machine, which all matches John's description. I will
see if I can roll back the wired driver or use one of the other
workarounds in the thread that I missed. (Reporting what it is
currently saying is not relevant though, as my laptop and I are at
work and not home and I know the addresses are different, and I'm not
using wireless while sitting at my desk at work.)

> Suddenly you sound like an immense pain in the ass that I'm personally
> not that interested in helping.

I don't mean to be a pain-in-the-ass. I'm simply an individual who is
trying to solve his own problem, and doing so with the little
knowledge he possesses, augmented by what info he can cajole out of
other sources. However, thank you for the insight, as being perceived
as a p-i-a is not useful for me getting further help.

In any case, if you have further problems with my attitude, perhaps we
should take them to email (last I checked my address was not
obfuscated), as I don't see that airing our dirty laundry is that
useful to the rest of the group...

Ok, here are annotated listings of the information I could get back.

First, before applying the workaround:

==>Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
==>(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ipconfig /all
==>
==>Windows IP Configuration
==>
==>An internal error occurred: A device attached to the system is not functioning.
==>
==>Please contact Microsoft Product Support Services for further help.
==>
==>Additional information: Unknown media status code.
==>

After applying the workaround where I disabled the wired connection in
the device manager, and before I turned the vpn connection on.

Note: I couldn't find the "routing and remote access service" so I
couldn't try that workaround. However, this workaround worked.

==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ipconfig /all
==>
==>Windows IP Configuration
==>
==> Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : hdxpl1030
==> Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : amr.corp.intel.com
==> Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Peer-Peer
==> IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
==> WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
==> DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : amr.corp.intel.com
==> corp.intel.com
==> intel.com
==>
==>Ethernet adapter Wireless Network Connection 5:
==>
==> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
==> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : 11a/b/g Wireless LAN Mini PCI Adapte
==>r
==> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-05-4E-51-16-9D
==> Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
==> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : No
==> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.105
==> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
==> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
==> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
==> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 66.189.0.29
==> 66.189.0.30
==> 66.189.0.5
==> Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Thursday, March 15, 2007 5:08:12 PM
==> Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Friday, March 16, 2007 5:08:12 PM
==>
==>Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2:
==>
==> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
==> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : VPN Client Virtual Adapter
==> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-C0-45-00-00-01
==> Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
==> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : No
==> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 0.0.0.0
==> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 0.0.0.0
==> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . :
==> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.255
==>

Next, after I turned VPN on:
Note at this point, I still had no problem.

==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ipconfig /all
==>
==>Windows IP Configuration
==>
==> Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : hdxpl1030
==> Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : amr.corp.intel.com
==> Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Peer-Peer
==> IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
==> WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
==> DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : amr.corp.intel.com
==> hd.intel.com
==> corp.intel.com
==> intel.com
==>
==>Ethernet adapter Wireless Network Connection 5:
==>
==> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
==> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : 11a/b/g Wireless LAN Mini PCI Adapte
==>r
==> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-05-4E-51-16-9D
==> Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
==> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : No
==> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.105
==> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
==> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
==> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
==> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 66.189.0.29
==> 66.189.0.30
==> 66.189.0.5
==> Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Thursday, March 15, 2007 5:08:12 PM
==> Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Friday, March 16, 2007 5:08:12 PM
==>
==>Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2:
==>
==> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : hd.intel.com
==> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : VPN Client Virtual Adapter
==> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-C0-45-00-00-01
==> Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
==> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : No
==> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.127.52.101
==> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.252.0
==> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 10.127.52.101
==> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.127.52.15
==> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.127.1.11
==> 146.152.3.1
==> Primary WINS Server . . . . . . . : 143.182.250.105
==> Secondary WINS Server . . . . . . : 134.134.128.37
==> Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Thursday, March 15, 2007 5:11:49 PM
==> Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Friday, March 14, 2008 5:11:49 PM
==>

Now, I took the laptop up to the office and put it in its docking
station and the connection "broke". Notice, how the ipconfig is now dead.

==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ipconfig /all
==>
==>Windows IP Configuration
==>
==>An internal error occurred: The handle is invalid.
==>
==>Please contact Microsoft Product Support Services for further help.
==>
==>Additional information: Unknown media status code.
==>

However, I'm not certain if this is an example of the problem, or
simply an artifact of going from undocked to docked. Therefore, I did
some more snooping. (Subsequent passage of time with no more
problems, suggest this is NOT the repetitive connection loss problem,
and in fact perhaps simply a docking issue.)

So, I looked at the devices, and now the wireless card was disabled
and the wired card was enabled. (I don't know how to capture that.)
I didn't do that. I presume something with docking caused it. I then
tried all the permutations of enabling and disabling the cards to see
if that would "fix" the problem, but to no avail.

==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ipconfig /all
==>
==>Windows IP Configuration
==>
==>An internal error occurred: The handle is invalid.
==>
==>Please contact Microsoft Product Support Services for further help.
==>
==>Additional information: Unknown media status code.
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ipconfig /all
==>
==>Windows IP Configuration
==>
==>An internal error occurred: The handle is invalid.
==>
==>Please contact Microsoft Product Support Services for further help.
==>
==>Additional information: Unknown media status code.
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ipconfig /all
==>
==>Windows IP Configuration
==>
==>An internal error occurred: The handle is invalid.
==>
==>Please contact Microsoft Product Support Services for further help.
==>
==>Additional information: Unknown media status code.
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ipconfig /all
==>
==>Windows IP Configuration
==>
==>An internal error occurred: The handle is invalid.
==>
==>Please contact Microsoft Product Support Services for further help.
==>
==>Additional information: Unknown media status code.
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ipconfig /all
==>
==>Windows IP Configuration
==>
==>An internal error occurred: The handle is invalid.
==>
==>Please contact Microsoft Product Support Services for further help.
==>
==>Additional information: Unknown media status code.
==>


I then reconnected VPN, and reread your posting. I don't surf or read
news or mail from my laptop. I only surf from my desktop. Thus, I
needed to fix the connection to see what other info to gather.

I saw you wanted to see the results of pinging a DNS server outside
the VPN connection. Note, these pings occurred after I fixed the VPN
connection.

==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ping 66.189.0.29
==>
==>Pinging 66.189.0.29 with 32 bytes of data:
==>
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>
==>Ping statistics for 66.189.0.29:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
==>

As, you can see, I can't see anything outside the VPN network from the
laptop. I then tried one of the DNS servers within the VPN. That
worked, as I would have expected.

==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ping 10.127.1.11
==>
==>Pinging 10.127.1.11 with 32 bytes of data:
==>
==>Reply from 10.127.1.11: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=60
==>Reply from 10.127.1.11: bytes=32 time=36ms TTL=60
==>Reply from 10.127.1.11: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=60
==>Reply from 10.127.1.11: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=60
==>
==>Ping statistics for 10.127.1.11:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
==>Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
==> Minimum = 28ms, Maximum = 42ms, Average = 33ms
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>

I don't know if this provides any useful information to you. I hope
it does. I next have to figure out how to get the error logs off my
router....

Thanks,
-Chris

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:55:51 -0400, Chris F Clark
<cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in
<sddfy86yv48.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>:

>I don't know if this provides any useful information to you. I hope
>it does. I next have to figure out how to get the error logs off my
>router....

What we need is comparative IPCONFIG information when you lose
connectivity.

--
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>

Here is an anotated seesion before and during the problem occurring.
(In fact the problem is occuring right now, although obvilously I can
"work through" the problem by simply keeping opening and closing the
RDP window. Closing the RDP window, waiting a bit and reopening it,
seems to correct the problem.)

Ok, here is the setting right after I booted the computer.

==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ipconfig /all
==>
==>Windows IP Configuration
==>
==> Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : hdxpl1030
==> Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : amr.corp.intel.com
==> Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Peer-Peer
==> IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
==> WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
==> DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : amr.corp.intel.com
==> hd.intel.com
==> corp.intel.com
==> intel.com
==>
==>Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 6:
==>
==> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
==> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/1000 MT Mobile Connecti
==>on
==> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-D0-59-33-EB-75
==> Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
==> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : No
==> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.106
==> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
==> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
==> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
==> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 66.189.0.29
==> 66.189.0.30
==> 66.189.0.5
==> Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Friday, March 16, 2007 6:03:10 PM
==> Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Saturday, March 17, 2007 6:03:10 PM
==>
==>Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2:
==>
==> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : hd.intel.com
==> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : VPN Client Virtual Adapter
==> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-C0-45-00-00-01
==> Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
==> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : No
==> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.127.56.148
==> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.252.0
==> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 10.127.56.148
==> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.127.56.16
==> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.127.1.11
==> 146.152.3.1
==> Primary WINS Server . . . . . . . : 134.134.128.37
==> Secondary WINS Server . . . . . . : 143.182.250.105
==> Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Friday, March 16, 2007 6:05:43 PM
==> Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Saturday, March 15, 2008 6:05:43 PM
==>

I then tried pinging the various DNS servers listed. First the ones
outside VPN, which were inaaccessible.

==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ping 66.189.0.29
==>
==>Pinging 66.189.0.29 with 32 bytes of data:
==>
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>
==>Ping statistics for 66.189.0.29:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ping 66.189.0.30
==>
==>Pinging 66.189.0.30 with 32 bytes of data:
==>
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>
==>Ping statistics for 66.189.0.30:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ping 66.189.0.05
==>
==>Pinging 66.189.0.5 with 32 bytes of data:
==>
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>
==>Ping statistics for 66.189.0.5:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
==>

Now, nmy local router. It's not a DNS server, but I would expect it
to be accessible.

==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ping 192.168.1.100
==>
==>Pinging 192.168.1.100 with 32 bytes of data:
==>
==>Reply from 192.168.1.100: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=64
==>Reply from 192.168.1.100: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
==>Reply from 192.168.1.100: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
==>Reply from 192.168.1.100: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
==>
==>Ping statistics for 192.168.1.100:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
==>Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
==> Minimum = 2ms, Maximum = 37ms, Average = 11ms
==>

Now, the DNS servers inside VPN. They are accessible.

==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ping 10.127.1.11
==>
==>Pinging 10.127.1.11 with 32 bytes of data:
==>
==>Reply from 10.127.1.11: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=60
==>Reply from 10.127.1.11: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=60
==>Reply from 10.127.1.11: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=60
==>Reply from 10.127.1.11: bytes=32 time=34ms TTL=60
==>
==>Ping statistics for 10.127.1.11:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
==>Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
==> Minimum = 32ms, Maximum = 37ms, Average = 34ms
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ping 146.152.3.1
==>
==>Pinging 146.152.3.1 with 32 bytes of data:
==>
==>Reply from 146.152.3.1: bytes=32 time=63ms TTL=58
==>Reply from 146.152.3.1: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=58
==>Request timed out.
==>Reply from 146.152.3.1: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=58
==>
==>Ping statistics for 146.152.3.1:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 3, Lost = 1 (25% loss),
==>Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
==> Minimum = 35ms, Maximum = 63ms, Average = 49ms
==>

Now, here I am having trouble. However, I don't see anything
different in the ipconfig information.

==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ipconfig /all
==>
==>Windows IP Configuration
==>
==> Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : hdxpl1030
==> Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : amr.corp.intel.com
==> Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Peer-Peer
==> IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
==> WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
==> DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : amr.corp.intel.com
==> hd.intel.com
==> corp.intel.com
==> intel.com
==>
==>Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 6:
==>
==> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
==> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/1000 MT Mobile Connecti
==>on
==> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-D0-59-33-EB-75
==> Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
==> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : No
==> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.106
==> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
==> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
==> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
==> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 66.189.0.29
==> 66.189.0.30
==> 66.189.0.5
==> Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Saturday, March 17, 2007 6:03:10 PM
==> Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Sunday, March 18, 2007 6:03:10 PM
==>
==>Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2:
==>
==> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : hd.intel.com
==> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : VPN Client Virtual Adapter
==> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-C0-45-00-00-01
==> Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
==> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : No
==> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.127.56.148
==> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.252.0
==> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 10.127.56.148
==> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.127.56.16
==> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.127.1.11
==> 146.152.3.1
==> Primary WINS Server . . . . . . . : 143.182.250.105
==> Secondary WINS Server . . . . . . : 134.134.128.37
==> Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Friday, March 16, 2007 6:05:43 PM
==> Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Saturday, March 15, 2008 6:05:43 PM
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ping 66.189.0.29
==>
==>Pinging 66.189.0.29 with 32 bytes of data:
==>
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>
==>Ping statistics for 66.189.0.29:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ping 66.189.0.05
==>
==>Pinging 66.189.0.5 with 32 bytes of data:
==>
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>Request timed out.
==>
==>Ping statistics for 66.189.0.5:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ping 192.168.1.100
==>
==>Pinging 192.168.1.100 with 32 bytes of data:
==>
==>Reply from 192.168.1.100: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=64
==>Reply from 192.168.1.100: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=64
==>Reply from 192.168.1.100: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
==>Reply from 192.168.1.100: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
==>
==>Ping statistics for 192.168.1.100:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
==>Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
==> Minimum = 2ms, Maximum = 56ms, Average = 16ms
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ping 10.127.1.11
==>
==>Pinging 10.127.1.11 with 32 bytes of data:
==>
==>Reply from 10.127.1.11: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=60
==>Reply from 10.127.1.11: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=60
==>Reply from 10.127.1.11: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=60
==>Reply from 10.127.1.11: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=60
==>
==>Ping statistics for 10.127.1.11:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
==>Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
==> Minimum = 28ms, Maximum = 31ms, Average = 29ms
==>
==>Ping statistics for 147.152.3.1:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>ping 146.152.3.1
==>
==>Pinging 146.152.3.1 with 32 bytes of data:
==>
==>Reply from 146.152.3.1: bytes=32 time=34ms TTL=58
==>Reply from 146.152.3.1: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=58
==>Reply from 146.152.3.1: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=58
==>Request timed out.
==>
==>Ping statistics for 146.152.3.1:
==> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 3, Lost = 1 (25% loss),
==>Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
==> Minimum = 34ms, Maximum = 49ms, Average = 39ms
==>
==>C:\Documents and Settings\cfclark>

The trouble has continued overnight. Again, the prmary visible
symptom is there is this "icon" that pops up in the RDP window that
means that the RDP connection is "lost". If I close, the window, let
it sit for a few seconds, and reopen it, it will generally come back.
If I don't close and reopen the window, but let it stay
"diswconnected" the VPN connection will eventually time out, say after
about 5 minuntes, and I'll have to reconnect VPN (and reenter the
security information).

Often when this occurs, if my wife is on the internet on her laptop
also, she'll say that her internet connection (e.g. to hotmail) will
get dropped at the same time.

The distinctive feature of this problem is its "regularity". Once, it
starts, it appears to repeat on regular intervals. For example, if
I'm down with my laptop, but watching TV, it appears that this problem
will occur between each and every station break.

I still don't know what I'm looking for as a cause.

Thanks,
-Chris

On the problem with the latest Intel PRO wired ethernet drivers not
disabling themselves properly and breaking "ipconfig all":

I have gotten some support from the Intel IT department (one of the
techs who I know cares--I've dealt with him before), and I have
explained the problem. From him I have some patches to try (always
try the canned solutions first), because I can't connect wirelessly at
work at all (and the ipconfig problem doesn't manifest itself if one
is connecting using only the wired connection). I don't know yet if
those patches will end up rolling back my wired driver or not.

If they do not roll back the driver and I can demonstrate the problem,
then he will try to help me determine how to get it fixed. However,
he said that he did not know how to find which group in Intel is
responsible for the wired ethernet drivers. Hopefully, if we can
escalate the problem appropriately, we will find the right group to
fix it.

Thus, I still cannot promise that the wired drivers will ever get
fixed, but I am trying to make that happen.

(And then hopefully, we can get back to my problem of the mysterious
repeating "interference".)

Chris

On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:03:14 -0400, Chris F Clark
<cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in
<sddy7lnsjml.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>:

>On the problem with the latest Intel PRO wired ethernet drivers not
>disabling themselves properly and breaking "ipconfig all":
>
>I have gotten some support from the Intel IT department (one of the
>techs who I know cares--I've dealt with him before), and I have
>explained the problem. From him I have some patches to try (always
>try the canned solutions first), because I can't connect wirelessly at
>work at all (and the ipconfig problem doesn't manifest itself if one
>is connecting using only the wired connection). I don't know yet if
>those patches will end up rolling back my wired driver or not.
>
>If they do not roll back the driver and I can demonstrate the problem,
>then he will try to help me determine how to get it fixed. However,
>he said that he did not know how to find which group in Intel is
>responsible for the wired ethernet drivers. Hopefully, if we can
>escalate the problem appropriately, we will find the right group to
>fix it.
>
>Thus, I still cannot promise that the wired drivers will ever get
>fixed, but I am trying to make that happen.
>
>(And then hopefully, we can get back to my problem of the mysterious
>repeating "interference".)

Sounds like you are making some progress. It's just unfortunate, sad
and frustrating that it's so hard to get companies like Intel to take
notice of problems in their products. It inevitably makes me less
likely to use and recommend them.

--
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_How_To>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> writes:

> Sounds like you are making some progress. It's just unfortunate, sad
> and frustrating that it's so hard to get companies like Intel to take
> notice of problems in their products. It inevitably makes me less
> likely to use and recommend them.

Of course, it isn't a problem unique to Intel (or large companies in
general). However, large companies often develop bureaucracies where
such problems proliferate, since often it isn't "locally" optimum to
be accountable and responsible. I don't have a good solution to that
problem, and even if I thought I did, it wouldn't be on topic in this
group. It is still frustrating....

On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 12:23:18 -0400, Chris F Clark
<cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in
<sddd52suih5.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>:

>John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> writes:
>
>> Sounds like you are making some progress. It's just unfortunate, sad
>> and frustrating that it's so hard to get companies like Intel to take
>> notice of problems in their products. It inevitably makes me less
>> likely to use and recommend them.
>
>Of course, it isn't a problem unique to Intel (or large companies in
>general). However, large companies often develop bureaucracies where
>such problems proliferate, since often it isn't "locally" optimum to
>be accountable and responsible. I don't have a good solution to that
>problem, and even if I thought I did, it wouldn't be on topic in this
>group. It is still frustrating....

True, but Intel is the only company I know of that has this particular
issue, and it has so much presence in the market that the issue is
significant. It's not only a matter of respect for the customer, it's a
matter of corporate responsibility.

--
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_How_To>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

Well we know how far corporate responsibility goes. Remember Enron/MCI and a
whole host of others. In the end corporations are only loyal to one thing.
THE STOCK PRICE. If its cheaper to be irresponsible then they will do it.
That's reality.

Doug


"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:652o0317spucre5iepnqlvh7vma4r4tceo@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 12:23:18 -0400, Chris F Clark
> <cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in
> <sddd52suih5.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>:
>
>>John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> writes:
>>
>>> Sounds like you are making some progress. It's just unfortunate, sad
>>> and frustrating that it's so hard to get companies like Intel to take
>>> notice of problems in their products. It inevitably makes me less
>>> likely to use and recommend them.
>>
>>Of course, it isn't a problem unique to Intel (or large companies in
>>general). However, large companies often develop bureaucracies where
>>such problems proliferate, since often it isn't "locally" optimum to
>>be accountable and responsible. I don't have a good solution to that
>>problem, and even if I thought I did, it wouldn't be on topic in this
>>group. It is still frustrating....
>
> True, but Intel is the only company I know of that has this particular
> issue, and it has so much presence in the market that the issue is
> significant. It's not only a matter of respect for the customer, it's a
> matter of corporate responsibility.
>
> --
> 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_How_To>
> Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>