Wireless issues, but oddly the opposite of what you normallyhear....

Steve Flynn anothermindbomb at gmail.com
Tue Dec 2 21:29:08 UTC 2008

On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 8:36 PM, Karl Larsen <klarsen1 at gmail.com> wrote:

>    Your saying if the router is not broken then it's fine. This is
> complete false. Most routers with WiFi that do not work are due to poor
> setup. I see them all the time and after doing a Google search for a pdf
> manual I set it up right and it works.

Please explain to me how a router which is broadcasting on Ch 13
(perfectly legally) is bad.

Consider in your answer that one OS sees it, one doesn't. Explain how
this is the "fault" of the router. Bear in mind that the router is
broadcasting correctly on Ch 13 at all stages when you construct your

The access point is presenting a valid (for my country) point of
contact. Linux can see it but fails to authenticate with the correct
Changing the channel the router is broadcasting on means that Linux
CAN authenticate.
Explain to me how THAT can possibly be the fault of the router.

Seriously, you're a ham radio buff... you should know about this
stuff... Please attempt an explanation.

When one person suffers from a delusion it is insanity. When many
people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list