Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 15 Oct 2007 10:55:20 -0700
From:      "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net>
To:        Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com>
Cc:        freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Odd error messages on wireless 11a connection 
Message-ID:  <20071015175520.7F9964500E@ptavv.es.net>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 15 Oct 2007 10:20:09 PDT." <4713A149.9010301@errno.com> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--==_Exmh_1192470920_62484P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

> Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 10:20:09 -0700
> From: Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com>
> 
> Sam Leffler wrote:
> > Kevin Oberman wrote:
> >> I am at a major networking conference and my wireless, while working, is
> >> logging lots of errors that I don't understand at all.
> >>
> >> +update_stats: bogus ndx0 7, max 7, mode 1
> >>
> >> Can anyone explain what these are? Do I need to be concerned?
> >>
> >> Atheros 5212 on FreeBSD current as of Oct. 5, i386, single processor
> >> system. ath0: <Atheros 5212> mem 0xb4000000-0xb400ffff irq 11 at 
> >> device 2.0 on pci11
> >> ath0: [ITHREAD]
> >> ath0: using obsoleted if_watchdog interface
> >> ath0: Ethernet address: 00:14:a4:60:f2:e3
> >> ath0: mac 5.9 phy 4.3 radio 3.6
> >>   
> > Update your ath driver.  You've found an ap that is beaconing a 
> > "pureg" rate set and a recent change to the sample rate code broke that.
> 
> Actually your interface is marked "pureb" and the ap is sending an 11g 
> rate set but the answer is the same--update ath_rate/sample.c.

OK. I updated and no longer am seeing the messages. Thanks!

One issue...I booted with WPA DHCP and the system skipped the higher
priority 11a net and associated with the b/g net. I did a 'list aps' and
only saw 2 APs, both 11g. I know that there should have been more, so I
did a 'scan' and all the rest appeared, including the 11a APs. (Total of
8 APs, 4 11b/g and 4 11a.) The supplicant now associated with the 11a
net and my system is running MUCH better!

Any idea if this is a timing issue? Any way to improve the initial scan?

Thanks again for the very fast responses.
-- 
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: oberman@es.net			Phone: +1 510 486-8634
Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4  EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751

--==_Exmh_1192470920_62484P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 06/03/2002

iD8DBQFHE6mIkn3rs5h7N1ERAgmDAJ4w5z2vMdGXdOSgzuWvRuhC/HIf1QCfUbs2
/AAW+FOHGuOIWnBX0YLe2kY=
=DizE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--==_Exmh_1192470920_62484P--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071015175520.7F9964500E>