Wifi connection problems
Home › Forums › GeeXboX for PC › Wifi connection problems
Tagged: wifi
This topic contains 3 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by
tomlohave 4 days, 22 hours ago.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 7, 2013 at 16:50 #6918
Hi
Do you have any hints on debugging wifi connection problems. I followed the instructions in the documentation for updating /etc/network, then restarted the connman, but I have no connectivity — pinging anywhere in the subnet fails.
I can see nothing helpful in dmesg:
[ 1611.978464] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: RF_KILL bit toggled to enable radio.
[ 1611.982229] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: RF_KILL bit toggled to disable radio.
[ 1661.781297] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: RF_KILL bit toggled to enable radio.
[ 1662.812869] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: RF_KILL bit toggled to disable radio.
[ 1854.040947] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: RF_KILL bit toggled to enable radio.Output of dmesg | grep iwl:
[ 75.531779] iwl4965: Intel(R) Wireless WiFi 4965 driver for Linux, in-tree:
[ 75.531781] iwl4965: Copyright(c) 2003-2011 Intel Corporation
[ 75.532085] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: Detected Intel(R) Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN, REV=0×4
[ 75.576849] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: device EEPROM VER=0×36, CALIB=0×5
[ 75.581751] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: Tunable channels: 13 802.11bg, 19 802.11a channels
[ 75.582043] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: irq 46 for MSI/MSI-X
[ 75.656578] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: loaded firmware version 228.61.2.24
[ 75.656811] ieee80211 phy0: Selected rate control algorithm ‘iwl-4965-rs’
[ 79.633956] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: RF_KILL bit toggled to disable radio.
[ 1611.978464] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: RF_KILL bit toggled to enable radio.
[ 1611.982229] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: RF_KILL bit toggled to disable radio.
[ 1661.781297] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: RF_KILL bit toggled to enable radio.
[ 1662.812869] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: RF_KILL bit toggled to disable radio.
[ 1854.040947] iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: RF_KILL bit toggled to enable radio.rfkill shows that the wlan is not blocked.
ifconfig shows that the wlan is not connected:
wlan0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1F:3B:98:6B:B7
UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B)And below is my network configuration:
Any hints?
cheers – Barry
# Network configuration
# Backend software to use for network management (e.g. “connman”)
NETWORK_BACKEND=”connman”# “LAN” or “WLAN” or “” (default is “” <-> “LAN”)
NETWORK=”WLAN”# Network interface name or address (e.g. “eth0″ or “00:0d:56:ec:ba:0c”)
IFACE=”wlan0″# Static IP address (“” for DHCP) in CIDR format (e.g. “192.168.1.1/24″)
ADDRESS=””# Network gateway (e.g. “192.168.1.254″)
GATEWAY=””# List of DNS servers (e.g. “192.168.1.253 192.168.1.254″)
# This will override the DNS servers from DHCP
DNS_SERVER=””SSID=”xxxxxxxx”
# “true” or “”
HIDDEN=””# “WEP” or “PSK” or “” or “RSN”
SECURITY=”PSK”PASSPHRASE=”xxxxxxxx”
# set to “” to disable NTP
TIMESERVERS=”0.geexbox.pool.ntp.org 1.geexbox.pool.ntp.org 2.geexbox.pool.ntp.org 3.geexbox.pool.ntp.org”# Services to be started at boot time
TELNET_SERVER=true
FTP_SERVER=true
HTTP_SERVER=”false”
SAMBA_SERVER=”false”# Use Zeroconf service discovery
ZEROCONF=”true”# Static Samba shares can be defined as shown in the commented examples below,
# where <%>,<@>,<&>,<#> field separators must be present as shown (Note that
# the password cannot contain these special delimiters):#STATIC_SMB=”username<%>password<@>ip<&>myservername<#>share1<#>share2<#>share3″
#STATIC_SMB=”<%><@>ip<&>myservername<#>share1″#WAIT_FOR_SLOW_DEVICE=”false”
September 7, 2013 at 19:34 #6920iwl4965 0000:0c:00.0: RF_KILL bit toggled to enable radio.the problem seems to be here
what is your version of geexbox ? Did you try a devel version (new kernel) ?
September 8, 2013 at 11:14 #6926Hi Tom
Thanks for the quick reply. I thought rfkill was ok as all seemed to be enabled, but I will try with the devel version. I was using v3.0. I’m out of town for the next week but as soon as I have any progress I will report back,
cheers – Barry
September 8, 2013 at 11:33 #6927While googling, see quite the same problem with the same hardware once my question
Yes please, test the devel version. Waiting for the feedback
BR
-
AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.