2.8 Firmware: Wireless Connection breaks after a random time

Talk about anything you like here: as long as it's technical, doesn't fit into the other categories and is within the rules. Questions and discussions about operating systems, programming, websites, hosting, ADSL etc. are particularly welcome here.
User avatar
Muhon
Regular
Regular
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:48 am
Location: Lima - Peru
Contact:

2.8 Firmware: Wireless Connection breaks after a random time

Post by Muhon » Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:39 pm

Hi there guys, I just updated my firmware version to 2.8. Everything is smooth, except my laptop loses connection after random time. It's weird, since "physical" connection stays (I never receive a "connection lost" message) but suddenly ping fails and all connectivity is lost. The solution I give to it is disconnecting from the AP and reconnecting. This didn't happen in 2.7 though.

What suggestions do you have? I tried changing the mode from Mixed to G Only, and the channels of the WiFi (I currently use channel 3, tried with 6, 11 and 1). Nothing happened. Ah, the signal power is 100%, I'm testing right next to the router so it's not a signal power issue.

Thanks!
Regards,
Muhon
User avatar
thechief
RouterTech Team
RouterTech Team
Posts: 12067
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 10:22 pm
Location: England, the Centre of Africa
Contact:

Post by thechief » Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:50 pm

Check your laptop. There is nothing between 2.7 and 2.8 that should make the tiniest bit of difference to wireless connectivity.
The Chief: :afro: Be sure to read the Firmware FAQ and do a Forum Search before posting!
No support via PM. Ask all questions on the open forum.
User avatar
Muhon
Regular
Regular
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:48 am
Location: Lima - Peru
Contact:

Post by Muhon » Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:17 pm

Thanks for answering. I did check it, connectivity is lost also in linux. Perhaps a misinstallation or something could be the issue? I did upgrade and then restore to factory default settings, though. I'll test with another laptop asap as well.
Regards,
Muhon
KevinR
Regular
Regular
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:51 pm

Post by KevinR » Thu Jan 29, 2009 2:49 am

Had a similar problem with an XP PC (in 2007?) posted about it on here somewhere. Basically XP kept losing the connection and appears to be designed to suicide the link if there are any problems. Tried 2 wireless cards both official and cross-installed drivers, bigger aerials, windows-one-touch ON and OFF, hardsetting the IPs as DHCP-client/driver sets magic IPs if link is slow coming backup, oh and lots of XP updates.

Eventually we stuffed a CAT5 cable under the bedroom/landing floor! Could not prove it wasn't the radio conditions, nearby mains wiring or the router BUT wireless worked to another bedroom and to an old 11b laptop with no trouble.

Wireless can be fragile BUT XP really treats it in a toxic way. In general a down link is unlikely to come back up correctly.
User avatar
Muhon
Regular
Regular
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:48 am
Location: Lima - Peru
Contact:

Post by Muhon » Thu Jan 29, 2009 4:40 am

I had an issue like you mention after upgrading to SP3. After several attempts to fix it, I decided to downgrade to SP2. It happens with Broadcom Wireless Cards (BCM43XX). Not sure about other stuff.

I'm still waiting for another laptop to test the connectivity, in both linux and windows.
Regards,
Muhon
User avatar
Muhon
Regular
Regular
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:48 am
Location: Lima - Peru
Contact:

Post by Muhon » Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:57 am

Edit: Problem NOT Fixed

It appears that the upgrade failed (somehow) and the firmware installation was faulty. The router suddenly crashed and I had to hard reset it to make it work again. I reflashed the firmware and this time it did work perfectly. After resetting to default settings (hard reset) I found out many more options available. However, laptop keeps losing data transfer (but keeps connected, ping fails though).

I did find something interesting though. I have the ASUS AAM6020VI-T4, and the new led.conf is explendid. I'm very happy with this, thanks guys. However, under Ethernet configuration (setup), the port numbers are inverted (1 2 3 4 are 4 3 2 1). So when I'm connected to port 1 and 2, it appears as if ports 4 and 3 are working, and 1 and 2 are disconnected. Maybe for next version this could be fixed? Thanks and keep up the good work :D

I'll still wait for another laptop to test.
Regards,
Muhon
User avatar
Muhon
Regular
Regular
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:48 am
Location: Lima - Peru
Contact:

Post by Muhon » Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:10 pm

Hi there. I haven't been able to test with another computer, but I used my Access Connections logging to check the errors. I found these:

Code: Select all

ERROR AcMurocHlpr(Familia León(Prvlg).1612.2216) [2/2]11:07:35:669 CAcMurocImpl::GetAuthStatus: GetAuthenticationStatus() Failed! Muroc ErrCode(0X80045202)=IWLAN_E_FAILURE

ERROR AcMurocHlpr(Familia León(Prvlg).1612.2216) [2/2]11:07:35:669 CAcMurocImpl::GetAuthStatus: Reporting AC_WL_AUTH_STATUS_UNKWN
What does that mean? I kinda think MAYBE it's the WPA... but weird because before the router upgrade (I was in 2.5, not 2.7 sorry) I didn't have issues.

Thanks.
Regards,
Muhon
User avatar
thechief
RouterTech Team
RouterTech Team
Posts: 12067
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 10:22 pm
Location: England, the Centre of Africa
Contact:

Post by thechief » Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:23 pm

I have no idea what that means. All the wireless stuff is exactly the same in 2.5 and 2.8, so I am not sure what the issue is.
The Chief: :afro: Be sure to read the Firmware FAQ and do a Forum Search before posting!
No support via PM. Ask all questions on the open forum.
User avatar
Muhon
Regular
Regular
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:48 am
Location: Lima - Peru
Contact:

Post by Muhon » Tue Feb 03, 2009 5:39 pm

I found something interesting. I left a console pinging the gateway endlessly and it seems that if the connection is forced to transmit something then it won't lose connectivity. So I figure that the connectivity lost is due to the connection being idle. Is there an idle timer implemented somewhere?
Regards,
Muhon
User avatar
thechief
RouterTech Team
RouterTech Team
Posts: 12067
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 10:22 pm
Location: England, the Centre of Africa
Contact:

Post by thechief » Tue Feb 03, 2009 5:44 pm

Muhon wrote:Is there an idle timer implemented somewhere?
Not that I am aware of. You should look at your wireless card's configuration settings. They normally contain all sorts of stuff like that.
The Chief: :afro: Be sure to read the Firmware FAQ and do a Forum Search before posting!
No support via PM. Ask all questions on the open forum.
User avatar
Shotokan101
RouterTech Team
RouterTech Team
Posts: 4779
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:17 pm
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Post by Shotokan101 » Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:02 pm

Muhon wrote:I found something interesting. I left a console pinging the gateway endlessly and it seems that if the connection is forced to transmit something then it won't lose connectivity. So I figure that the connectivity lost is due to the connection being idle. Is there an idle timer implemented somewhere?
Have you checked the device settings in device manager to ensure that you've disabled any power saving timeout options ?

EDIT: ...also may be worth downgrading back to 2.7 to confirm the problem really does disappear.....

Jim
Jim

.....I'm Sorry But I Can't Do That Dave.....
User avatar
Muhon
Regular
Regular
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:48 am
Location: Lima - Peru
Contact:

Post by Muhon » Fri Feb 13, 2009 4:06 pm

Hey guys, I did check what you told me. It appears it's a windows issue, but I'm not sure. I found this in the event manager, just after the connection broke.


Code: Select all

TCP/IP has reached the security limit imposed on the number of concurrent TCP connect attempts.

For more information, see Help and Support Center at [url]http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp[/url].
There, it reads the following:

Code: Select all

Details 
Product: Windows Operating System 
ID: 4226 
Source: Tcpip 
Version: 5.2 
Symbolic Name: EVENT_TCPIP_TCP_CONNECT_LIMIT_REACHED 
Message: TCP/IP has reached the security limit imposed on the number of concurrent (incomplete) TCP connect attempts. 
    
Explanation 
The TCP/IP stack in Windows XP with Service Pack 2 (SP2) installed limits the number of concurrent, incomplete outbound TCP connection attempts. When the limit is reached, subsequent connection attempts are put in a queue and resolved at a fixed rate so that there are only a limited number of connections in the incomplete state. During normal operation, when programs are connecting to available hosts at valid IP addresses, no limit is imposed on the number of connections in the incomplete state. When the number of incomplete connections exceeds the limit, for example, as a result of programs connecting to IP addresses that are not valid, connection-rate limitations are invoked, and this event is logged.

Establishing connection–rate limitations helps to limit the speed at which malicious programs, such as viruses and worms, spread to uninfected computers. Malicious programs often attempt to reach uninfected computers by opening simultaneous connections to random IP addresses. Most of these random addresses result in failed connections, so a burst of such activity on a computer is a signal that it may have been infected by a malicious program.

Connection-rate limitations may cause certain security tools, such as port scanners, to run more slowly.
 
    
User Action 
This event is a warning that a malicious program or a virus might be running on the system. To troubleshoot the issue, find the program that is responsible for the failing connection attempts and, if the program might be malicious, close the program as follows.

To close the program

At the command prompt, type
Netstat – no
Find the process with a large number of open connections that are not yet established.
These connections are indicated by the TCP state SYN_SENT in the State column of the Active Connections information.
Note the process identification number (PID) of the process in the PID column.
Press CTRL+ALT+DELETE and then click Task Manager.
On the Processes tab, select the processes with the matching PID, and then click End Process.
If you need to select the option to view the PID for processes, on the View menu, click Select Columns, select the PID (Process Identifier) check box, and then click OK.
 
However, I am sure I don't have malicious programs. I get disconnected by playing Steam's Day of Defeat (the one thing I can get to disconnect me, other disconnections are random). If TCP/IP stack is having those problems, is there a way to fix it? (BTW feel free to move the topic since it no longer represents a firmware issue).

Thanks!

EDIT: I downgraded to 2.7... still happens. I found, however, a "fix" for the issue, found at http://www.speedguide.net/read_articles.php?id=1497. It did solve the TCP/IP Stack issue, but I still get random disconnects... I wonder what would be the problem now.
Regards,
Muhon
mstombs
RouterTech Team
RouterTech Team
Posts: 3753
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 11:54 pm

Post by mstombs » Fri Feb 13, 2009 11:18 pm

Ah the infamous event 4226. Firefox with the fasterfox add-in is enough to break windows XP SP2, can be fixed with the lvlLord patch and several other tools. Note has to be re-applied regularly after M$ updates
User avatar
thechief
RouterTech Team
RouterTech Team
Posts: 12067
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 10:22 pm
Location: England, the Centre of Africa
Contact:

Post by thechief » Fri Feb 13, 2009 11:27 pm

Since this is not a firmware issue, I suggest it be moved to a more appropriate place (e.g., free chat technical - DONE).

Be that as it may, I guess the real solution is to upgrade your XP to SP3?
The Chief: :afro: Be sure to read the Firmware FAQ and do a Forum Search before posting!
No support via PM. Ask all questions on the open forum.
mstombs
RouterTech Team
RouterTech Team
Posts: 3753
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 11:54 pm

Post by mstombs » Sat Feb 14, 2009 10:03 am

No XP SP3 has same issue, its not a bug -its a deliberate security feature. The same patch still works
Post Reply