From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 15 20:19:27 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5ABE1065672 for ; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 20:19:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ganbold@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pv0-f182.google.com (mail-pv0-f182.google.com [74.125.83.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C168FC13 for ; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 20:19:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pvg2 with SMTP id 2so395892pvg.13 for ; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 13:19:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=prLuekubBf2PD9j9/SXDJXLh4NFC14C9m87NqSOlQ44=; b=LkGdnkd5hg1/lZ0zmREWdOsx8XXhN7umoc42Ksp9hs0dc4LYfUFRpgU+AEExnBzkNm BzcX8j4RfvZtBDeZuzmyBt40zqbQSSdmK1xQFxAjWUxor0ACB1bOcpFA+OKyqgXpQuuy e3nhh6rmi8+nMwHocMcM/qg438BZoxjDAejfo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=DjGYgMzkkTrwXefpimyp5qPyksmvhp893fCwsxSZMUPYtli3F6BsCa9UB7yCntWjWu /peib3Vxh9lI3fs530jnvE9ak2jj+kId+LusKcWI+9ALnWMA/u4ElSbwYFcGDIhPnv4E XvDUyefDdqU4JeBo/S8ew/FeQJOKjaAqDr02U= Received: by 10.115.28.1 with SMTP id f1mr6165722waj.181.1276633166952; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 13:19:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from beastie.micom.mng.net ([202.179.21.129]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d16sm41272669wam.12.2010.06.15.13.19.22 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 15 Jun 2010 13:19:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C17E047.9020700@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 04:19:19 +0800 From: Ganbold User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20091011) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: PseudoCylon References: <16641.96608.qm@web51806.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4BA38B26.6050208@micom.mng.net> <989377.89740.qm@web51802.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4BAE01AC.7000509@gmail.com> <623907.37074.qm@web51803.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4BB3575D.4040506@gmail.com> <87836.79143.qm@web51804.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4BBB372C.1060302@gmail.com> <665283.95271.qm@web51802.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4BBDEC8F.9050803@gmail.com> <490521.32714.qm@web51804.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4BD307DE.5080507@gmail.com> <332448.8676.qm@web51801.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4BD3F2D4.8000007@gmail.com> <702632.81988.qm@web51803.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4BDEE393.4080206@gmail.com> <660085.11669.qm@web51802.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4BFD4806.8070001@gmail.com> <618770.37649.qm@web51807.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4C0FAEA2.7010204@gmail.com> <94007.38072.qm@web51807.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4C11188A.1040002@gmail.com> <447555.80295.qm@web51803.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4C16499A.3050808@gmail.com> <337427.44900.qm@web51804.mail.re2.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <337427.44900.qm@web51804.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ganbold Tsagaankhuu , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CALL for TEST [HOSTAP] run(4) ralink usb wireless X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 20:19:27 -0000 AK-san, PseudoCylon wrote: >>>> From: Ganbold >>>> To: PseudoCylon >>>> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Ganbold Tsagaankhuu >>>> Sent: Thu, June 10, 2010 10:53:30 AM >>>> Subject: Re: CALL for TEST [HOSTAP] run(4) ralink usb wireless >>>> >>>> It seems like it is running without any problem so far, no more adsl >>>> modem problem. >>>> I can see arp packets in wlan0 interface as well as in macbook. >>>> I will continue testing and let you know if there comes any problem. >>>> >>>> thanks again, >>>> >>>> Ganbold >>>> >>>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Glad to hear. It was an encryption problem. A client was dropping packets.. >>> >>> Please let me know if you find another bug. (Hope there won't be) >>> >>> >> Well, looks like I was too fast :( >> >> It seems like client is not receiving any arp packets when rspro doesn't >> first initiate ping (maybe arp request) to client. >> If I first ping to client from rspro, later on arp packets can be seen >> on client. >> When I ping from rspro to client, response is very different: >> >> # arp -a >> ? (192.168.1.43) at 8e:fd:59:d6:3a:50 on bridge0 permanent [bridge] >> ? (192.168.1.42) at 00:22:cf:03:e0:30 on wlan0 permanent [ethernet] >> ? (192.168.1.41) at 00:15:6d:c1:c7:77 on arge0 permanent [ethernet] >> ? (192.168.1.1) at 00:30:54:62:3d:24 on arge0 expires in 1200 seconds >> [ethernet] >> ? (192.168.1.7) at 00:1c:25:9d:36:1d on arge0 expires in 824 seconds >> [ethernet] >> # ping 192.168.1.50 >> PING 192.168.1.50 (192.168.1.50): 56 data bytes >> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.50: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=2.694 ms >> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.50: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=302.177 ms >> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.50: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1.041 ms >> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.50: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=5234.417 ms >> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.50: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=4225.060 ms >> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.50: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=3214.908 ms >> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.50: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=2207.241 ms >> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.50: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=1197.061 ms >> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.50: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=186.833 ms >> ^C >> --- 192.168.1.50 ping statistics --- >> 11 packets transmitted, 9 packets received, 18.2% packet loss >> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.041/1841.270/5234.417/1870.962 ms >> # arp -a >> ? (192.168.1.43) at 8e:fd:59:d6:3a:50 on bridge0 permanent [bridge] >> ? (192.168.1.42) at 00:22:cf:03:e0:30 on wlan0 permanent [ethernet] >> ? (192.168.1.41) at 00:15:6d:c1:c7:77 on arge0 permanent [ethernet] >> ? (192.168.1.1) at 00:30:54:62:3d:24 on arge0 expires in 1183 seconds >> [ethernet] >> ? (192.168.1.7) at 00:1c:25:9d:36:1d on arge0 expires in 805 seconds >> [ethernet] >> ? (192.168.1.50) at 00:26:bb:17:f6:61 on arge0 expires in 1186 seconds >> [ethernet] >> # ping 192.168.1.50 >> PING 192.168.1.50 (192.168.1.50): 56 data bytes >> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.50: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1590.035 ms >> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.50: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=580.201 ms >> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.50: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=528.019 ms >> ^C >> --- 192.168.1.50 ping statistics --- >> 5 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 40.0% packet loss >> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 528.019/899.418/1590.035/488.804 ms >> >> > > Well, the patch is working (sort of). Old driver wouldn't let you ping anywhere. > > Replies are taking awfully long. One of them took 5 sec. This could be a different issue. > > Can you try a few thing? (Unfortunately, everything is working on my side.) > * Before ping from rspro, does ping from macbook to 192.168.1.42 (wlan0) work? > Just tested again, it doesn't work from macbook. > * If you give IP address to only bridge0, does it make any difference? > It makes no difference. Ganbold > * Does it make any difference if use rspro without 192.168.1.7 (if possible)? > > wlandebug doesn't work on macbook, does it? > > Can you show me your hostapd.conf (minus password, of course). I'll try with the same config. > > And, if you ping from macbook, would it take that long? > > > AK > > >> Any idea? >> >> thanks, >> >> Ganbold >> > > > > > -- Optimist, n.: A bagpiper with a beeper.