Re: [BLUG] how to receive my own posts on this list?

Hah, it's just the difference between how much you value an enormous tech company not having detailed information with which to target ads to you and the time and money cost of rolling your own mail server and setting up effective spam filters.

I for one welcome our robot overlord. :)

On Aug 20, 2014 10:21 AM, Mark Krenz <mark@suso.com> wrote:

On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 12:05:22PM GMT, Kevin Hunter Kesling [hunteke@gmail.com] said the following:
> At 7:42am -0400 Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Rob Henderson wrote:
> >this is a gmail "feature" whereby it doesn't show you your own posts
> >to mailing lists "to save you time and prevent clutter". More details
> >here
> >
> >   https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6588?hl=en
> >
> >This is a common point of confusion with gmail and is a "feature" I
> >sure wish they would get rid of (or at least make optional).
>
> Damn.  I, too, find that annoying.  Thank you for that find.  That
> makes strike two of Gmail with lists.  (Given my first thread here,
> and now this, is it obvious that is the first time I've used Gmail
> with lists?)
>
> Thanks mate,
>
> Kevin


 That would be an annoying feature if it can't be disabled. Sorry you
have to deal with that. How much does gmail cost again? ;-)

  Mark



--
Mark S. Krenz
IT Director
Suso Technology Services, Inc.
 
Sent from Mutt using Linux
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] how to receive my own posts on this list?

On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 12:05:22PM GMT, Kevin Hunter Kesling [hunteke@gmail.com] said the following:
> At 7:42am -0400 Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Rob Henderson wrote:
> >this is a gmail "feature" whereby it doesn't show you your own posts
> >to mailing lists "to save you time and prevent clutter". More details
> >here
> >
> > https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6588?hl=en
> >
> >This is a common point of confusion with gmail and is a "feature" I
> >sure wish they would get rid of (or at least make optional).
>
> Damn. I, too, find that annoying. Thank you for that find. That
> makes strike two of Gmail with lists. (Given my first thread here,
> and now this, is it obvious that is the first time I've used Gmail
> with lists?)
>
> Thanks mate,
>
> Kevin


That would be an annoying feature if it can't be disabled. Sorry you
have to deal with that. How much does gmail cost again? ;-)

Mark



--
Mark S. Krenz
IT Director
Suso Technology Services, Inc.

Sent from Mutt using Linux
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] how to receive my own posts on this list?

I've been playing with ownCloud (starting with the easy part). So far I like it. No more unlimited space, but we can't have it all ....

On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 8:05 AM, Kevin Hunter Kesling <hunteke@gmail.com> wrote:

At 7:56am -0400 Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Kirk Gleason wrote:

Yet another reason for me to get moving forward on the
de-googlification of my life.

Right on.  Once I finish grad-school, one of the items on my TODO list is looking into the feasibility of a personal mail server.  There are a number of details to figure out, of course, (including is it worth it given the hordes of spam!) but de-googlification is the main reason.

Cheers,

Kevin
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

--
Kirk Gleason

Re: [BLUG] how to receive my own posts on this list?

At 7:56am -0400 Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Kirk Gleason wrote:
> Yet another reason for me to get moving forward on the
> de-googlification of my life.

Right on. Once I finish grad-school, one of the items on my TODO list
is looking into the feasibility of a personal mail server. There are a
number of details to figure out, of course, (including is it worth it
given the hordes of spam!) but de-googlification is the main reason.

Cheers,

Kevin
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] how to receive my own posts on this list?

At 7:42am -0400 Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Rob Henderson wrote:
> this is a gmail "feature" whereby it doesn't show you your own posts
> to mailing lists "to save you time and prevent clutter". More details
> here
>
> https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6588?hl=en
>
> This is a common point of confusion with gmail and is a "feature" I
> sure wish they would get rid of (or at least make optional).

Damn. I, too, find that annoying. Thank you for that find. That makes
strike two of Gmail with lists. (Given my first thread here, and now
this, is it obvious that is the first time I've used Gmail with lists?)

Thanks mate,

Kevin
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] how to receive my own posts on this list?

Yet another reason for me to get moving forward on the de-googlification of my life.

On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 7:42 AM, Rob Henderson <robh@indiana.edu> wrote:

Hey Kevin, this is a gmail "feature" whereby it doesn't show you your own posts to mailing lists "to save you time and prevent clutter".  More details here:

  https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6588?hl=en

This is a common point of confusion with gmail and is a "feature" I sure wish they would get rid of (or at least make optional).

   --Rob

On 08/20/2014 12:44 AM, Kevin Hunter Kesling wrote:

* I'm not sure if the blug-owner account is actively monitored, so I'm
now re-sending this email to the list.

Hi BLUG List,

I've noted in the two threads in which I've recently participated that I
am not receiving my own posts to this list.  I prefer to receive my own
posts because I use that as a check that the list did in fact receive my
email.  I believe I've checked the right bit:

     http://www.list.org/mailman-member/node23.html

And, in line with this rather-outdated-but-perhaps-still-relevent
thread, I do _not_ send include myself in the CC:


https://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2004-December/041340.html

Does anyone have any clues why I might not be receiving my own posts?

Thanks,

Kevin
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

--
Kirk Gleason

Re: [BLUG] how to receive my own posts on this list?

Hey Kevin, this is a gmail "feature" whereby it doesn't show you your
own posts to mailing lists "to save you time and prevent clutter". More
details here:

https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6588?hl=en

This is a common point of confusion with gmail and is a "feature" I sure
wish they would get rid of (or at least make optional).

--Rob

On 08/20/2014 12:44 AM, Kevin Hunter Kesling wrote:
> * I'm not sure if the blug-owner account is actively monitored, so I'm
> now re-sending this email to the list.
>
> Hi BLUG List,
>
> I've noted in the two threads in which I've recently participated that I
> am not receiving my own posts to this list. I prefer to receive my own
> posts because I use that as a check that the list did in fact receive my
> email. I believe I've checked the right bit:
>
> http://www.list.org/mailman-member/node23.html
>
> And, in line with this rather-outdated-but-perhaps-still-relevent
> thread, I do _not_ send include myself in the CC:
>
>
> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2004-December/041340.html
>
> Does anyone have any clues why I might not be receiving my own posts?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kevin
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

[BLUG] how to receive my own posts on this list?

* I'm not sure if the blug-owner account is actively monitored, so I'm
now re-sending this email to the list.

Hi BLUG List,

I've noted in the two threads in which I've recently participated that I
am not receiving my own posts to this list. I prefer to receive my own
posts because I use that as a check that the list did in fact receive my
email. I believe I've checked the right bit:

http://www.list.org/mailman-member/node23.html

And, in line with this rather-outdated-but-perhaps-still-relevent
thread, I do _not_ send include myself in the CC:


https://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2004-December/041340.html

Does anyone have any clues why I might not be receiving my own posts?

Thanks,

Kevin
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

At 1:55pm -0400 Wed, 13 Aug 2014, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
> AFA "did something," it was the Comcast tech who "did something" on his
> end. No Comcaster has seen or touched my machine.

Then this answers the first question to within a 95% confidence level
(for me anyway): the issue is entirely with the Xfinity. Good luck
convincing the tech of that, however.

> At this point I've noticed it simply seems to be a function of time:
> I wait, say, 15 minutes . . . and it suddenly works. All the while,
> though, the connection icon is lit, saying I'm good to go. But yeah,
> wait ten, fifteen and it works. Disconnect, reconnect, works
> immediately.

As someone else suggested, this sounds like a timeout; either a process
giving up, or a process finally being started. I'm reminded of the SySV
init sequence, where each process comes up one-by-one. If there was a
network hiccup, the boot sequence could hang for 5 minutes while the
script slept waiting for issue to (never) resolve.

> Could someone suggest a wifi router that would be compatible with an
> Xfinity XB3? I tried my old Quest PK5000, but it's a DSL modem.

I suggest that almost any wireless router you pick will work as the
issue is with the Xfinity wifi, not it's ethernet. The standard setup
would be this:

Internet <--> Xfinity <--> WifiRouter <--> your machine

where the Xfinity modem and WifiRouter should talk over an ethernet cable.

If you're looking for a wireless router that's less than crap, I'd pick
one that you could flash later. You don't have to flash it, but at
least you'll have the option to. OpenWRT maintains a list that may be
helpful to you:

https://openwrt.org/
-> http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/start

Like Mark, I'm a (proud?) owner of a WNDR3800. It works, and I don't
have to inspect it (but I generally cover my bases) to know that some
network issue is further up the line. It was ~$100 when I bought it;
not the cheapest, but a good middle-of-the-road option.

Good luck,

Kevin
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

I second this. I have a similar model and couldn't be happier with it. Definitely a great value

> On Aug 14, 2014, at 12:30, Mark Warner <mhwarner@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 08/13/2014 01:55 PM, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
>> Could someone suggest a wifi router that would be compatible with an Xfinity XB3? I tried my old Quest PK5000, but it's a DSL modem.
>
> I recently replaced both my modem and router. Modem is a Motorola SURFboard eXtreme mdl SB6121, and the router is a Netgear WNDR3400. Both have worked very very well. Total for both was about $150.
>
> --
> Mark Warner
> MEPIS Linux
> Registered Linux User #415318
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

On 08/13/2014 01:55 PM, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
>
> Could someone suggest a wifi router that would be compatible with an
> Xfinity XB3? I tried my old Quest PK5000, but it's a DSL modem.

I recently replaced both my modem and router. Modem is a Motorola
SURFboard eXtreme mdl SB6121, and the router is a Netgear WNDR3400. Both
have worked very very well. Total for both was about $150.

--
Mark Warner
MEPIS Linux
Registered Linux User #415318



_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

Yeah, I'm aware. What's the acronym... mdi-x? Medium dependent interface?

Though it's pretty much a standard feature, I've also run across devices since that was implemented which either don't manage it properly or still just don't have it. Not everything (seems like it's usually the consumer stuff) uses the internal switching, so I still keep a couple x-overs I've made just in case.

I suggest a crossover cable in this case because it should work with one whether the device automatically switches the contacts on the port or not. Hunter's right though, there's no real reason not to try it with a regular old ethernet cable.

On Aug 13, 2014 5:06 PM, Kevin Hunter Kesling <hunteke@gmail.com> wrote:

At 2:47pm -0400 Wed, 13 Aug 2014, Ryan Lee Kiser wrote:
> I presume you can connect to one of the Ethernet ports with a
> crossover cable into a wireless router and just use it as a modem.

As a friendly FYI: 10+ years ago, the term crossover cable meant that
the ethernet cable in question had the relevant input and output wires
switched from a normal ethernet cable, so that the output of port A
talked to the input of port B and vice versa.

This was necessary/convenient if you wanted to have two machines
communicate and you did not have a hub or switch available (and a second
ethernet cable).

Since ~2005, however, no special crossover cable is needed as all (to my
knowledge, anyway) ethernet cards have built-in hardware logic to
auto-negotiate which wires are input and output upon connection.  So,
when he says "crossover cable", you can translate that in your mind to
just "cable".  (Unless of course you're working with hardware older than
2005!)

Cheers,

Kevin
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

At 2:47pm -0400 Wed, 13 Aug 2014, Ryan Lee Kiser wrote:
> I presume you can connect to one of the Ethernet ports with a
> crossover cable into a wireless router and just use it as a modem.

As a friendly FYI: 10+ years ago, the term crossover cable meant that
the ethernet cable in question had the relevant input and output wires
switched from a normal ethernet cable, so that the output of port A
talked to the input of port B and vice versa.

This was necessary/convenient if you wanted to have two machines
communicate and you did not have a hub or switch available (and a second
ethernet cable).

Since ~2005, however, no special crossover cable is needed as all (to my
knowledge, anyway) ethernet cards have built-in hardware logic to
auto-negotiate which wires are input and output upon connection. So,
when he says "crossover cable", you can translate that in your mind to
just "cable". (Unless of course you're working with hardware older than
2005!)

Cheers,

Kevin
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

I'm thinking that the big time delay before it gives me real connectivity has something to do with some sort of protocol/program that is running, running, running, then finally timing out. If so, it's blocking my connectivity.

BTW, thanks for all your help for this Indiana newbie!

LB

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Kiser, Ryan Lee <rlkiser@iu.edu> wrote:

I presume this is it?

http://www.cisco.com/web/consumer/support/modem_DPC3939.html

 

I have zero experience with that hardware, so take what I have to say with a grain of salt, but I presume you can connect to one of the Ethernet ports with a crossover cable into a wireless router and just use it as a modem. That should work unless Comcast is doing something really wacky and/or obnoxious with their hardware. I imagine you'll want to ask them if they can disable the wireless radios in the box to keep it from interfering before buying something for yourself.

 

I personally like the Asus and Buffalo wireless N routers. I've had good luck with both. I've been using a Buffalo Airstation N600 running their DD-WRT firmware setup at home for the past 3 years or so with a Motorola Surfboard modem and haven't had a single problem with it since I ditched Comcast's modem to use my own. Lots of nice features come with DD-WRT as well if you're willing to dig into the technical stuff.

 

Another thing to consider if you think the XB3 is the source of your headaches… If you're paying to rent the XB3 from them it might be worth it in the long run to invest in your own modem. I was paying $6 a month to use their basic modem (Motorola SB5100) before I bought my own, so that's $72 a year. I bought the Motorola Surfboard SB6120 for $65 shipped. It's been consistently faster (DOCSIS 3.0! Whee!) and more reliable and it's still going strong 3 years later. The downside is that you'd be responsible for it yourself. If something goes sideways Comcast can use the "your hardware's probably causing it" excuse to get out of support. I got to hear that from them once before I bought my own modem to replace their leased junk modem. Not fun.

 

Just something to think about.

 

-Ryan

 

From: blug-bounces@lists.bloomingtonlinux.org [mailto:blug-bounces@lists.bloomingtonlinux.org] On Behalf Of Lawrence Bottorff
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 1:55 PM
To: Bloomington LINUX Users Group
Subject: Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

 

AFA "did something," it was the Comcast tech who "did something" on his end. No Comcaster has seen or touched my machine.

 

At this point I've noticed it simply seems to be a function of time: I wait, say, 15 minutes . . . and it suddenly works. All the while, though, the connection icon is lit, saying I'm good to go. But yeah, wait ten, fifteen and it works. Disconnect, reconnect, works immediately. 

 

Could someone suggest a wifi router that would be compatible with an Xfinity XB3? I tried my old Quest PK5000, but it's a DSL modem.

 

LB

 

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Kirk Gleason <kgleason@gmail.com> wrote:

Concur completely. But I did get that line from a technician. It *was* hard not to laugh in his face, but I did manage.

 

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, dosman <dosman@packetsniffers.org> wrote:

Blanket statements like "your wifi is not as fast as our wifi" are laughable at best. There's no magic Comcast wifi protocol that works better. Anything any provider tells you over the phone needs to be taken with a grain of salt, they are just reading from a script. The only people I would trust are the technicians that show up at your door, and even then not all of those folks are as sharp as one would hope, but my personal experience with them has been very good (both AT&T and Comcast techs).

On Aug 13, 2014, at 8:57 AM, Kirk Gleason wrote:

> Also worth noting is that Comcast tries to do some things with their "free wifi-routers" that I find to be suspicious and you have to jump through a bunch of hoops to be able to run your own router -- you have to specifically request that they convert the provided router to a bridge. I've had some serious issues with the provided Comcast WiFi stuff (not just in Linux) and in every case, I've ended up disabling the wifi on the Comcast provided device, getting them to enable the bridge mode, and running my router.
>
> Comcast alleges that this slows down your wifi. Perhaps. I don't have a baseline to test against. I know that in my house, we are able to comfortably run 2 netflix streams and a hulu stream simultaneously.
>
> Are you using the router from Comcast? If so, do you have access to a different router?
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Kevin Hunter Kesling <hunteke@gmail.com> wrote:
> At 5:07pm -0400 Sat, 09 Aug 2014, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
> I'm on U14.04 on my Thinkpad X201. I could not get Wifi to work at
> all initially. Then a Xfinity support person "changed something" and
> it . . . sort of worked.
>
> In context of the second sentence, it's not clear to me whether you are talking about the Xfinity hardware, or your laptop.  Did the Xfinity support personality help you with Linux on your laptop?  If so (and I gather from the other messages in this thread that they did), then I'm impressed, as I'm not aware of too many Linux support options for the desktop (okay, laptop) user.
>
> I'm also curious: you say they changed "something".  How did they do this?  Did you give them root access to your machine?
>
>
> That means it worked after fiddling with enable, disable, (I'm on
> Gnome classic). Actually, I don't know what I would do, but
> eventually it would work.
>
> For debugging purposes, it's important to describe what you mean by "wouldn't work".  Does the network just stop responding?  For example, are you in the middle of downloading a web page which stops halfway through, and then you note that you can't do anything (open any other website in another tab, ping a google.com, etc.)?  Does the NetworkManager applet animate as if it's unable to connect to a network?
>
> In a later message, you pasted some lines from the syslog.  I think some bits are missing from each session, which may be important for tracking down the issue.  Nevertheless, I do note one difference:
>
>     Bad session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
>
>      'HOME-2D4F-2.4' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.
>
>     Good session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
>
>      'HOME-2D4F-5' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.
>
> Given just this difference, 2.4 vs 5, I wonder if there is a mismatch in either the Xfinity implementation of 802.11n ("Wireless N"), or -- more likely -- is the wireless N driver incomplete on your X201?  In other words, given 802.11n, it is _not_ strange that it wants to use both frequencies (recall that 802.11n is a MIMO technology), but I wonder if the implementation is buggy.  Specifically, I know that Intel wireless Linux drivers had, at one point, some issues with 802.11n.  Do they still?
>
>
> Then I'd put it in suspend, come back . . . and it wouldn't work.
> Repeat fiddling, rebooting, etc., then it would work. Any ideas what
> I'm having probs with?
>
> Notwithstanding my above question, this general behavior echoes experiences I've had with some wireless firmware and kernel modules.  In the end, my solution was to remove the module, and reinsert it.  Since your lshw output suggests you use iwlwifi as your wireless driver, here's the relevant action from the command line:
>
>     $ sudo modprobe -r iwlwifi
>     $ sudo modprobe iwlwifi
>
> This is the moral equivalent of rebooting, but at the driver level.  At this point, if it doesn't "just work", you should be able to restart NetworkManager (sudo service networkmanager restart).  That simple trick has fixed 90% of my wireless "stopped working randomly or post-suspend" issues on Linux.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Kevin
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
>
>
> --
> Kirk Gleason
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

--
Kirk Gleason

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

 

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

I presume this is it?

http://www.cisco.com/web/consumer/support/modem_DPC3939.html

 

I have zero experience with that hardware, so take what I have to say with a grain of salt, but I presume you can connect to one of the Ethernet ports with a crossover cable into a wireless router and just use it as a modem. That should work unless Comcast is doing something really wacky and/or obnoxious with their hardware. I imagine you'll want to ask them if they can disable the wireless radios in the box to keep it from interfering before buying something for yourself.

 

I personally like the Asus and Buffalo wireless N routers. I've had good luck with both. I've been using a Buffalo Airstation N600 running their DD-WRT firmware setup at home for the past 3 years or so with a Motorola Surfboard modem and haven't had a single problem with it since I ditched Comcast's modem to use my own. Lots of nice features come with DD-WRT as well if you're willing to dig into the technical stuff.

 

Another thing to consider if you think the XB3 is the source of your headaches… If you're paying to rent the XB3 from them it might be worth it in the long run to invest in your own modem. I was paying $6 a month to use their basic modem (Motorola SB5100) before I bought my own, so that's $72 a year. I bought the Motorola Surfboard SB6120 for $65 shipped. It's been consistently faster (DOCSIS 3.0! Whee!) and more reliable and it's still going strong 3 years later. The downside is that you'd be responsible for it yourself. If something goes sideways Comcast can use the "your hardware's probably causing it" excuse to get out of support. I got to hear that from them once before I bought my own modem to replace their leased junk modem. Not fun.

 

Just something to think about.

 

-Ryan

 

From: blug-bounces@lists.bloomingtonlinux.org [mailto:blug-bounces@lists.bloomingtonlinux.org] On Behalf Of Lawrence Bottorff
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 1:55 PM
To: Bloomington LINUX Users Group
Subject: Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

 

AFA "did something," it was the Comcast tech who "did something" on his end. No Comcaster has seen or touched my machine.

 

At this point I've noticed it simply seems to be a function of time: I wait, say, 15 minutes . . . and it suddenly works. All the while, though, the connection icon is lit, saying I'm good to go. But yeah, wait ten, fifteen and it works. Disconnect, reconnect, works immediately. 

 

Could someone suggest a wifi router that would be compatible with an Xfinity XB3? I tried my old Quest PK5000, but it's a DSL modem.

 

LB

 

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Kirk Gleason <kgleason@gmail.com> wrote:

Concur completely. But I did get that line from a technician. It *was* hard not to laugh in his face, but I did manage.

 

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, dosman <dosman@packetsniffers.org> wrote:

Blanket statements like "your wifi is not as fast as our wifi" are laughable at best. There's no magic Comcast wifi protocol that works better. Anything any provider tells you over the phone needs to be taken with a grain of salt, they are just reading from a script. The only people I would trust are the technicians that show up at your door, and even then not all of those folks are as sharp as one would hope, but my personal experience with them has been very good (both AT&T and Comcast techs).

On Aug 13, 2014, at 8:57 AM, Kirk Gleason wrote:

> Also worth noting is that Comcast tries to do some things with their "free wifi-routers" that I find to be suspicious and you have to jump through a bunch of hoops to be able to run your own router -- you have to specifically request that they convert the provided router to a bridge. I've had some serious issues with the provided Comcast WiFi stuff (not just in Linux) and in every case, I've ended up disabling the wifi on the Comcast provided device, getting them to enable the bridge mode, and running my router.
>
> Comcast alleges that this slows down your wifi. Perhaps. I don't have a baseline to test against. I know that in my house, we are able to comfortably run 2 netflix streams and a hulu stream simultaneously.
>
> Are you using the router from Comcast? If so, do you have access to a different router?
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Kevin Hunter Kesling <hunteke@gmail.com> wrote:
> At 5:07pm -0400 Sat, 09 Aug 2014, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
> I'm on U14.04 on my Thinkpad X201. I could not get Wifi to work at
> all initially. Then a Xfinity support person "changed something" and
> it . . . sort of worked.
>
> In context of the second sentence, it's not clear to me whether you are talking about the Xfinity hardware, or your laptop.  Did the Xfinity support personality help you with Linux on your laptop?  If so (and I gather from the other messages in this thread that they did), then I'm impressed, as I'm not aware of too many Linux support options for the desktop (okay, laptop) user.
>
> I'm also curious: you say they changed "something".  How did they do this?  Did you give them root access to your machine?
>
>
> That means it worked after fiddling with enable, disable, (I'm on
> Gnome classic). Actually, I don't know what I would do, but
> eventually it would work.
>
> For debugging purposes, it's important to describe what you mean by "wouldn't work".  Does the network just stop responding?  For example, are you in the middle of downloading a web page which stops halfway through, and then you note that you can't do anything (open any other website in another tab, ping a google.com, etc.)?  Does the NetworkManager applet animate as if it's unable to connect to a network?
>
> In a later message, you pasted some lines from the syslog.  I think some bits are missing from each session, which may be important for tracking down the issue.  Nevertheless, I do note one difference:
>
>     Bad session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
>
>      'HOME-2D4F-2.4' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.
>
>     Good session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
>
>      'HOME-2D4F-5' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.
>
> Given just this difference, 2.4 vs 5, I wonder if there is a mismatch in either the Xfinity implementation of 802.11n ("Wireless N"), or -- more likely -- is the wireless N driver incomplete on your X201?  In other words, given 802.11n, it is _not_ strange that it wants to use both frequencies (recall that 802.11n is a MIMO technology), but I wonder if the implementation is buggy.  Specifically, I know that Intel wireless Linux drivers had, at one point, some issues with 802.11n.  Do they still?
>
>
> Then I'd put it in suspend, come back . . . and it wouldn't work.
> Repeat fiddling, rebooting, etc., then it would work. Any ideas what
> I'm having probs with?
>
> Notwithstanding my above question, this general behavior echoes experiences I've had with some wireless firmware and kernel modules.  In the end, my solution was to remove the module, and reinsert it.  Since your lshw output suggests you use iwlwifi as your wireless driver, here's the relevant action from the command line:
>
>     $ sudo modprobe -r iwlwifi
>     $ sudo modprobe iwlwifi
>
> This is the moral equivalent of rebooting, but at the driver level.  At this point, if it doesn't "just work", you should be able to restart NetworkManager (sudo service networkmanager restart).  That simple trick has fixed 90% of my wireless "stopped working randomly or post-suspend" issues on Linux.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Kevin
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
>
>
> --
> Kirk Gleason
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

--
Kirk Gleason

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

 

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

I have an X201 as well but it runs Windows 8.1. When I first updated it
to Windows 8.1, I also ran into this weird problem that sometimes the
wireless connection stopped working after waking up form suspend or
hibernation. The following solution seems to help (and judging from your
reply, it might related to this problem. Thus see if the Linux driver
has this option or not):

http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows8_1-networking/windows-81-dropping-wireless-connection/88ef2187-38f6-436b-bc25-e92cf6fe05af

I have a Motorola SURFboard SBG6580 that is 3-in-1: 1) cable modem, 2)
with 4 1Gb ports and 3) wireless AP. Works pretty well with a large
range of wireless equipments.

Bruce

On 8/13/2014 1:55 PM, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
> AFA "did something," it was the Comcast tech who "did something" on
> his end. No Comcaster has seen or touched my machine.
>
> At this point I've noticed it simply seems to be a function of time: I
> wait, say, 15 minutes . . . and it suddenly works. All the while,
> though, the connection icon is lit, saying I'm good to go. But yeah,
> wait ten, fifteen and it works. Disconnect, reconnect, works immediately.
>
> Could someone suggest a wifi router that would be compatible with an
> Xfinity XB3? I tried my old Quest PK5000, but it's a DSL modem.
>
> LB
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Kirk Gleason <kgleason@gmail.com
> <mailto:kgleason@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Concur completely. But I did get that line from a technician. It
> *was* hard not to laugh in his face, but I did manage.
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, dosman <dosman@packetsniffers.org
> <mailto:dosman@packetsniffers.org>> wrote:
>
> Blanket statements like "your wifi is not as fast as our wifi"
> are laughable at best. There's no magic Comcast wifi protocol
> that works better. Anything any provider tells you over the
> phone needs to be taken with a grain of salt, they are just
> reading from a script. The only people I would trust are the
> technicians that show up at your door, and even then not all
> of those folks are as sharp as one would hope, but my personal
> experience with them has been very good (both AT&T and Comcast
> techs).
>
>
> On Aug 13, 2014, at 8:57 AM, Kirk Gleason wrote:
>
> > Also worth noting is that Comcast tries to do some things
> with their "free wifi-routers" that I find to be suspicious
> and you have to jump through a bunch of hoops to be able to
> run your own router -- you have to specifically request that
> they convert the provided router to a bridge. I've had some
> serious issues with the provided Comcast WiFi stuff (not just
> in Linux) and in every case, I've ended up disabling the wifi
> on the Comcast provided device, getting them to enable the
> bridge mode, and running my router.
> >
> > Comcast alleges that this slows down your wifi. Perhaps. I
> don't have a baseline to test against. I know that in my
> house, we are able to comfortably run 2 netflix streams and a
> hulu stream simultaneously.
> >
> > Are you using the router from Comcast? If so, do you have
> access to a different router?
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Kevin Hunter Kesling
> <hunteke@gmail.com <mailto:hunteke@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > At 5:07pm -0400 Sat, 09 Aug 2014, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
> > I'm on U14.04 on my Thinkpad X201. I could not get Wifi to
> work at
> > all initially. Then a Xfinity support person "changed
> something" and
> > it . . . sort of worked.
> >
> > In context of the second sentence, it's not clear to me
> whether you are talking about the Xfinity hardware, or your
> laptop. Did the Xfinity support personality help you with
> Linux on your laptop? If so (and I gather from the other
> messages in this thread that they did), then I'm impressed, as
> I'm not aware of too many Linux support options for the
> desktop (okay, laptop) user.
> >
> > I'm also curious: you say they changed "something". How did
> they do this? Did you give them root access to your machine?
> >
> >
> > That means it worked after fiddling with enable, disable,
> (I'm on
> > Gnome classic). Actually, I don't know what I would do, but
> > eventually it would work.
> >
> > For debugging purposes, it's important to describe what you
> mean by "wouldn't work". Does the network just stop
> responding? For example, are you in the middle of downloading
> a web page which stops halfway through, and then you note that
> you can't do anything (open any other website in another tab,
> ping a google.com <http://google.com>, etc.)? Does the
> NetworkManager applet animate as if it's unable to connect to
> a network?
> >
> > In a later message, you pasted some lines from the syslog.
> I think some bits are missing from each session, which may be
> important for tracking down the issue. Nevertheless, I do
> note one difference:
> >
> > Bad session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
> >
> > 'HOME-2D4F-2.4' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and
> DNS.
> >
> > Good session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
> >
> > 'HOME-2D4F-5' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.
> >
> > Given just this difference, 2.4 vs 5, I wonder if there is a
> mismatch in either the Xfinity implementation of 802.11n
> ("Wireless N"), or -- more likely -- is the wireless N driver
> incomplete on your X201? In other words, given 802.11n, it is
> _not_ strange that it wants to use both frequencies (recall
> that 802.11n is a MIMO technology), but I wonder if the
> implementation is buggy. Specifically, I know that Intel
> wireless Linux drivers had, at one point, some issues with
> 802.11n. Do they still?
> >
> >
> > Then I'd put it in suspend, come back . . . and it wouldn't
> work.
> > Repeat fiddling, rebooting, etc., then it would work. Any
> ideas what
> > I'm having probs with?
> >
> > Notwithstanding my above question, this general behavior
> echoes experiences I've had with some wireless firmware and
> kernel modules. In the end, my solution was to remove the
> module, and reinsert it. Since your lshw output suggests you
> use iwlwifi as your wireless driver, here's the relevant
> action from the command line:
> >
> > $ sudo modprobe -r iwlwifi
> > $ sudo modprobe iwlwifi
> >
> > This is the moral equivalent of rebooting, but at the driver
> level. At this point, if it doesn't "just work", you should
> be able to restart NetworkManager (sudo service networkmanager
> restart). That simple trick has fixed 90% of my wireless
> "stopped working randomly or post-suspend" issues on Linux.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > BLUG mailing list
> > BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org <mailto:BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org>
> > http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Kirk Gleason
> > _______________________________________________
> > BLUG mailing list
> > BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org <mailto:BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org>
> > http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org <mailto:BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org>
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
>
>
>
> --
> Kirk Gleason
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org <mailto:BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org>
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

AFA "did something," it was the Comcast tech who "did something" on his end. No Comcaster has seen or touched my machine.

At this point I've noticed it simply seems to be a function of time: I wait, say, 15 minutes . . . and it suddenly works. All the while, though, the connection icon is lit, saying I'm good to go. But yeah, wait ten, fifteen and it works. Disconnect, reconnect, works immediately. 

Could someone suggest a wifi router that would be compatible with an Xfinity XB3? I tried my old Quest PK5000, but it's a DSL modem.

LB

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Kirk Gleason <kgleason@gmail.com> wrote:

Concur completely. But I did get that line from a technician. It *was* hard not to laugh in his face, but I did manage.

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, dosman <dosman@packetsniffers.org> wrote:

Blanket statements like "your wifi is not as fast as our wifi" are laughable at best. There's no magic Comcast wifi protocol that works better. Anything any provider tells you over the phone needs to be taken with a grain of salt, they are just reading from a script. The only people I would trust are the technicians that show up at your door, and even then not all of those folks are as sharp as one would hope, but my personal experience with them has been very good (both AT&T and Comcast techs).

On Aug 13, 2014, at 8:57 AM, Kirk Gleason wrote:

> Also worth noting is that Comcast tries to do some things with their "free wifi-routers" that I find to be suspicious and you have to jump through a bunch of hoops to be able to run your own router -- you have to specifically request that they convert the provided router to a bridge. I've had some serious issues with the provided Comcast WiFi stuff (not just in Linux) and in every case, I've ended up disabling the wifi on the Comcast provided device, getting them to enable the bridge mode, and running my router.
>
> Comcast alleges that this slows down your wifi. Perhaps. I don't have a baseline to test against. I know that in my house, we are able to comfortably run 2 netflix streams and a hulu stream simultaneously.
>
> Are you using the router from Comcast? If so, do you have access to a different router?
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Kevin Hunter Kesling <hunteke@gmail.com> wrote:
> At 5:07pm -0400 Sat, 09 Aug 2014, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
> I'm on U14.04 on my Thinkpad X201. I could not get Wifi to work at
> all initially. Then a Xfinity support person "changed something" and
> it . . . sort of worked.
>
> In context of the second sentence, it's not clear to me whether you are talking about the Xfinity hardware, or your laptop.  Did the Xfinity support personality help you with Linux on your laptop?  If so (and I gather from the other messages in this thread that they did), then I'm impressed, as I'm not aware of too many Linux support options for the desktop (okay, laptop) user.
>
> I'm also curious: you say they changed "something".  How did they do this?  Did you give them root access to your machine?
>
>
> That means it worked after fiddling with enable, disable, (I'm on
> Gnome classic). Actually, I don't know what I would do, but
> eventually it would work.
>
> For debugging purposes, it's important to describe what you mean by "wouldn't work".  Does the network just stop responding?  For example, are you in the middle of downloading a web page which stops halfway through, and then you note that you can't do anything (open any other website in another tab, ping a google.com, etc.)?  Does the NetworkManager applet animate as if it's unable to connect to a network?
>
> In a later message, you pasted some lines from the syslog.  I think some bits are missing from each session, which may be important for tracking down the issue.  Nevertheless, I do note one difference:
>
>     Bad session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
>
>      'HOME-2D4F-2.4' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.
>
>     Good session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
>
>      'HOME-2D4F-5' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.
>
> Given just this difference, 2.4 vs 5, I wonder if there is a mismatch in either the Xfinity implementation of 802.11n ("Wireless N"), or -- more likely -- is the wireless N driver incomplete on your X201?  In other words, given 802.11n, it is _not_ strange that it wants to use both frequencies (recall that 802.11n is a MIMO technology), but I wonder if the implementation is buggy.  Specifically, I know that Intel wireless Linux drivers had, at one point, some issues with 802.11n.  Do they still?
>
>
> Then I'd put it in suspend, come back . . . and it wouldn't work.
> Repeat fiddling, rebooting, etc., then it would work. Any ideas what
> I'm having probs with?
>
> Notwithstanding my above question, this general behavior echoes experiences I've had with some wireless firmware and kernel modules.  In the end, my solution was to remove the module, and reinsert it.  Since your lshw output suggests you use iwlwifi as your wireless driver, here's the relevant action from the command line:
>
>     $ sudo modprobe -r iwlwifi
>     $ sudo modprobe iwlwifi
>
> This is the moral equivalent of rebooting, but at the driver level.  At this point, if it doesn't "just work", you should be able to restart NetworkManager (sudo service networkmanager restart).  That simple trick has fixed 90% of my wireless "stopped working randomly or post-suspend" issues on Linux.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Kevin
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
>
>
> --
> Kirk Gleason
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

--
Kirk Gleason

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

Concur completely. But I did get that line from a technician. It *was* hard not to laugh in his face, but I did manage.

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, dosman <dosman@packetsniffers.org> wrote:

Blanket statements like "your wifi is not as fast as our wifi" are laughable at best. There's no magic Comcast wifi protocol that works better. Anything any provider tells you over the phone needs to be taken with a grain of salt, they are just reading from a script. The only people I would trust are the technicians that show up at your door, and even then not all of those folks are as sharp as one would hope, but my personal experience with them has been very good (both AT&T and Comcast techs).

On Aug 13, 2014, at 8:57 AM, Kirk Gleason wrote:

> Also worth noting is that Comcast tries to do some things with their "free wifi-routers" that I find to be suspicious and you have to jump through a bunch of hoops to be able to run your own router -- you have to specifically request that they convert the provided router to a bridge. I've had some serious issues with the provided Comcast WiFi stuff (not just in Linux) and in every case, I've ended up disabling the wifi on the Comcast provided device, getting them to enable the bridge mode, and running my router.
>
> Comcast alleges that this slows down your wifi. Perhaps. I don't have a baseline to test against. I know that in my house, we are able to comfortably run 2 netflix streams and a hulu stream simultaneously.
>
> Are you using the router from Comcast? If so, do you have access to a different router?
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Kevin Hunter Kesling <hunteke@gmail.com> wrote:
> At 5:07pm -0400 Sat, 09 Aug 2014, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
> I'm on U14.04 on my Thinkpad X201. I could not get Wifi to work at
> all initially. Then a Xfinity support person "changed something" and
> it . . . sort of worked.
>
> In context of the second sentence, it's not clear to me whether you are talking about the Xfinity hardware, or your laptop.  Did the Xfinity support personality help you with Linux on your laptop?  If so (and I gather from the other messages in this thread that they did), then I'm impressed, as I'm not aware of too many Linux support options for the desktop (okay, laptop) user.
>
> I'm also curious: you say they changed "something".  How did they do this?  Did you give them root access to your machine?
>
>
> That means it worked after fiddling with enable, disable, (I'm on
> Gnome classic). Actually, I don't know what I would do, but
> eventually it would work.
>
> For debugging purposes, it's important to describe what you mean by "wouldn't work".  Does the network just stop responding?  For example, are you in the middle of downloading a web page which stops halfway through, and then you note that you can't do anything (open any other website in another tab, ping a google.com, etc.)?  Does the NetworkManager applet animate as if it's unable to connect to a network?
>
> In a later message, you pasted some lines from the syslog.  I think some bits are missing from each session, which may be important for tracking down the issue.  Nevertheless, I do note one difference:
>
>     Bad session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
>
>      'HOME-2D4F-2.4' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.
>
>     Good session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
>
>      'HOME-2D4F-5' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.
>
> Given just this difference, 2.4 vs 5, I wonder if there is a mismatch in either the Xfinity implementation of 802.11n ("Wireless N"), or -- more likely -- is the wireless N driver incomplete on your X201?  In other words, given 802.11n, it is _not_ strange that it wants to use both frequencies (recall that 802.11n is a MIMO technology), but I wonder if the implementation is buggy.  Specifically, I know that Intel wireless Linux drivers had, at one point, some issues with 802.11n.  Do they still?
>
>
> Then I'd put it in suspend, come back . . . and it wouldn't work.
> Repeat fiddling, rebooting, etc., then it would work. Any ideas what
> I'm having probs with?
>
> Notwithstanding my above question, this general behavior echoes experiences I've had with some wireless firmware and kernel modules.  In the end, my solution was to remove the module, and reinsert it.  Since your lshw output suggests you use iwlwifi as your wireless driver, here's the relevant action from the command line:
>
>     $ sudo modprobe -r iwlwifi
>     $ sudo modprobe iwlwifi
>
> This is the moral equivalent of rebooting, but at the driver level.  At this point, if it doesn't "just work", you should be able to restart NetworkManager (sudo service networkmanager restart).  That simple trick has fixed 90% of my wireless "stopped working randomly or post-suspend" issues on Linux.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Kevin
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
>
>
> --
> Kirk Gleason
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

--
Kirk Gleason

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

Blanket statements like "your wifi is not as fast as our wifi" are laughable at best. There's no magic Comcast wifi protocol that works better. Anything any provider tells you over the phone needs to be taken with a grain of salt, they are just reading from a script. The only people I would trust are the technicians that show up at your door, and even then not all of those folks are as sharp as one would hope, but my personal experience with them has been very good (both AT&T and Comcast techs).


On Aug 13, 2014, at 8:57 AM, Kirk Gleason wrote:

> Also worth noting is that Comcast tries to do some things with their "free wifi-routers" that I find to be suspicious and you have to jump through a bunch of hoops to be able to run your own router -- you have to specifically request that they convert the provided router to a bridge. I've had some serious issues with the provided Comcast WiFi stuff (not just in Linux) and in every case, I've ended up disabling the wifi on the Comcast provided device, getting them to enable the bridge mode, and running my router.
>
> Comcast alleges that this slows down your wifi. Perhaps. I don't have a baseline to test against. I know that in my house, we are able to comfortably run 2 netflix streams and a hulu stream simultaneously.
>
> Are you using the router from Comcast? If so, do you have access to a different router?
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Kevin Hunter Kesling <hunteke@gmail.com> wrote:
> At 5:07pm -0400 Sat, 09 Aug 2014, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
> I'm on U14.04 on my Thinkpad X201. I could not get Wifi to work at
> all initially. Then a Xfinity support person "changed something" and
> it . . . sort of worked.
>
> In context of the second sentence, it's not clear to me whether you are talking about the Xfinity hardware, or your laptop. Did the Xfinity support personality help you with Linux on your laptop? If so (and I gather from the other messages in this thread that they did), then I'm impressed, as I'm not aware of too many Linux support options for the desktop (okay, laptop) user.
>
> I'm also curious: you say they changed "something". How did they do this? Did you give them root access to your machine?
>
>
> That means it worked after fiddling with enable, disable, (I'm on
> Gnome classic). Actually, I don't know what I would do, but
> eventually it would work.
>
> For debugging purposes, it's important to describe what you mean by "wouldn't work". Does the network just stop responding? For example, are you in the middle of downloading a web page which stops halfway through, and then you note that you can't do anything (open any other website in another tab, ping a google.com, etc.)? Does the NetworkManager applet animate as if it's unable to connect to a network?
>
> In a later message, you pasted some lines from the syslog. I think some bits are missing from each session, which may be important for tracking down the issue. Nevertheless, I do note one difference:
>
> Bad session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
>
> 'HOME-2D4F-2.4' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.
>
> Good session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
>
> 'HOME-2D4F-5' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.
>
> Given just this difference, 2.4 vs 5, I wonder if there is a mismatch in either the Xfinity implementation of 802.11n ("Wireless N"), or -- more likely -- is the wireless N driver incomplete on your X201? In other words, given 802.11n, it is _not_ strange that it wants to use both frequencies (recall that 802.11n is a MIMO technology), but I wonder if the implementation is buggy. Specifically, I know that Intel wireless Linux drivers had, at one point, some issues with 802.11n. Do they still?
>
>
> Then I'd put it in suspend, come back . . . and it wouldn't work.
> Repeat fiddling, rebooting, etc., then it would work. Any ideas what
> I'm having probs with?
>
> Notwithstanding my above question, this general behavior echoes experiences I've had with some wireless firmware and kernel modules. In the end, my solution was to remove the module, and reinsert it. Since your lshw output suggests you use iwlwifi as your wireless driver, here's the relevant action from the command line:
>
> $ sudo modprobe -r iwlwifi
> $ sudo modprobe iwlwifi
>
> This is the moral equivalent of rebooting, but at the driver level. At this point, if it doesn't "just work", you should be able to restart NetworkManager (sudo service networkmanager restart). That simple trick has fixed 90% of my wireless "stopped working randomly or post-suspend" issues on Linux.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Kevin
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
>
>
> --
> Kirk Gleason
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

Also worth noting is that Comcast tries to do some things with their "free wifi-routers" that I find to be suspicious and you have to jump through a bunch of hoops to be able to run your own router -- you have to specifically request that they convert the provided router to a bridge. I've had some serious issues with the provided Comcast WiFi stuff (not just in Linux) and in every case, I've ended up disabling the wifi on the Comcast provided device, getting them to enable the bridge mode, and running my router.

Comcast alleges that this slows down your wifi. Perhaps. I don't have a baseline to test against. I know that in my house, we are able to comfortably run 2 netflix streams and a hulu stream simultaneously.

Are you using the router from Comcast? If so, do you have access to a different router?

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Kevin Hunter Kesling <hunteke@gmail.com> wrote:

At 5:07pm -0400 Sat, 09 Aug 2014, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:

I'm on U14.04 on my Thinkpad X201. I could not get Wifi to work at
all initially. Then a Xfinity support person "changed something" and
it . . . sort of worked.

In context of the second sentence, it's not clear to me whether you are talking about the Xfinity hardware, or your laptop.  Did the Xfinity support personality help you with Linux on your laptop?  If so (and I gather from the other messages in this thread that they did), then I'm impressed, as I'm not aware of too many Linux support options for the desktop (okay, laptop) user.

I'm also curious: you say they changed "something".  How did they do this?  Did you give them root access to your machine?

That means it worked after fiddling with enable, disable, (I'm on
Gnome classic). Actually, I don't know what I would do, but
eventually it would work.

For debugging purposes, it's important to describe what you mean by "wouldn't work".  Does the network just stop responding?  For example, are you in the middle of downloading a web page which stops halfway through, and then you note that you can't do anything (open any other website in another tab, ping a google.com, etc.)?  Does the NetworkManager applet animate as if it's unable to connect to a network?

In a later message, you pasted some lines from the syslog.  I think some bits are missing from each session, which may be important for tracking down the issue.  Nevertheless, I do note one difference:

    Bad session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set

     'HOME-2D4F-2.4' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.

    Good session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set

     'HOME-2D4F-5' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.

Given just this difference, 2.4 vs 5, I wonder if there is a mismatch in either the Xfinity implementation of 802.11n ("Wireless N"), or -- more likely -- is the wireless N driver incomplete on your X201?  In other words, given 802.11n, it is _not_ strange that it wants to use both frequencies (recall that 802.11n is a MIMO technology), but I wonder if the implementation is buggy.  Specifically, I know that Intel wireless Linux drivers had, at one point, some issues with 802.11n.  Do they still?

Then I'd put it in suspend, come back . . . and it wouldn't work.
Repeat fiddling, rebooting, etc., then it would work. Any ideas what
I'm having probs with?

Notwithstanding my above question, this general behavior echoes experiences I've had with some wireless firmware and kernel modules.  In the end, my solution was to remove the module, and reinsert it.  Since your lshw output suggests you use iwlwifi as your wireless driver, here's the relevant action from the command line:

    $ sudo modprobe -r iwlwifi
    $ sudo modprobe iwlwifi

This is the moral equivalent of rebooting, but at the driver level.  At this point, if it doesn't "just work", you should be able to restart NetworkManager (sudo service networkmanager restart).  That simple trick has fixed 90% of my wireless "stopped working randomly or post-suspend" issues on Linux.

Cheers,

Kevin

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

--
Kirk Gleason

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

At 5:07pm -0400 Sat, 09 Aug 2014, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
> I'm on U14.04 on my Thinkpad X201. I could not get Wifi to work at
> all initially. Then a Xfinity support person "changed something" and
> it . . . sort of worked.

In context of the second sentence, it's not clear to me whether you are
talking about the Xfinity hardware, or your laptop. Did the Xfinity
support personality help you with Linux on your laptop? If so (and I
gather from the other messages in this thread that they did), then I'm
impressed, as I'm not aware of too many Linux support options for the
desktop (okay, laptop) user.

I'm also curious: you say they changed "something". How did they do
this? Did you give them root access to your machine?

> That means it worked after fiddling with enable, disable, (I'm on
> Gnome classic). Actually, I don't know what I would do, but
> eventually it would work.

For debugging purposes, it's important to describe what you mean by
"wouldn't work". Does the network just stop responding? For example,
are you in the middle of downloading a web page which stops halfway
through, and then you note that you can't do anything (open any other
website in another tab, ping a google.com, etc.)? Does the
NetworkManager applet animate as if it's unable to connect to a network?

In a later message, you pasted some lines from the syslog. I think some
bits are missing from each session, which may be important for tracking
down the issue. Nevertheless, I do note one difference:

Bad session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
'HOME-2D4F-2.4' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.

Good session: NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Policy set
'HOME-2D4F-5' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.

Given just this difference, 2.4 vs 5, I wonder if there is a mismatch in
either the Xfinity implementation of 802.11n ("Wireless N"), or -- more
likely -- is the wireless N driver incomplete on your X201? In other
words, given 802.11n, it is _not_ strange that it wants to use both
frequencies (recall that 802.11n is a MIMO technology), but I wonder if
the implementation is buggy. Specifically, I know that Intel wireless
Linux drivers had, at one point, some issues with 802.11n. Do they still?

> Then I'd put it in suspend, come back . . . and it wouldn't work.
> Repeat fiddling, rebooting, etc., then it would work. Any ideas what
> I'm having probs with?

Notwithstanding my above question, this general behavior echoes
experiences I've had with some wireless firmware and kernel modules. In
the end, my solution was to remove the module, and reinsert it. Since
your lshw output suggests you use iwlwifi as your wireless driver,
here's the relevant action from the command line:

$ sudo modprobe -r iwlwifi
$ sudo modprobe iwlwifi

This is the moral equivalent of rebooting, but at the driver level. At
this point, if it doesn't "just work", you should be able to restart
NetworkManager (sudo service networkmanager restart). That simple trick
has fixed 90% of my wireless "stopped working randomly or post-suspend"
issues on Linux.

Cheers,

Kevin
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] Xfinity, Ubuntu woes

WAG: disable anything related to IPV6 in both the computer and the router.

On 08/11/2014 10:06 PM, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
> It only has happened here and now on this home Xfinity wifi. Here's a
> "bad" session:
>
> $ cat /var/log/syslog | grep -e wlan -e iwl -e etwork | tail -n25
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> (wlan2): DHCPv4 state changed nbi -> preinit
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 dhclient: Listening on
> LPF/wlan2/58:94:6b:79:8a:68
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 dhclient: Sending on Â
> LPF/wlan2/58:94:6b:79:8a:68
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 dhclient: DHCPREQUEST of
> 172.15.255.28 on wlan2 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 (xid=0x2ffa2ef)
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> (wlan2): DHCPv4 state changed preinit -> reboot
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Â
> address 172.15.255.28
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Â
> prefix 24 (255.255.255.0)
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Â
> gateway 172.15.255.1
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Â
> hostname 'hercynia-ThinkPad-T61'
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Â
> nameserver '172.15.255.1'
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Activation (wlan2) Stage 5 of 5 (IPv4 Configure Commit) scheduled...
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Activation (wlan2) Stage 5 of 5 (IPv4 Commit) started...
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 avahi-daemon[1518]: Joining mDNS
> multicast group on interface wlan2.IPv4 with address 172.15.255.28.
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 avahi-daemon[1518]: New relevant
> interface wlan2.IPv4 for mDNS.
> Aug 11 21:59:15 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 avahi-daemon[1518]: Registering
> new address record for 172.15.255.28 on wlan2.IPv4.
> Aug 11 21:59:16 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> (wlan2): device state change: ip-config -> secondaries (reason 'none')
> [70 90 0]
> Aug 11 21:59:16 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Activation (wlan2) Stage 5 of 5 (IPv4 Commit) complete.
> Aug 11 21:59:16 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> (wlan2): device state change: secondaries -> activated (reason 'none')
> [90 100 0]
> Aug 11 21:59:16 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> NetworkManager state is now CONNECTED_GLOBAL
> Aug 11 21:59:16 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Policy set 'HOME-2D4F-2.4' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.
> Aug 11 21:59:16 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Writing DNS information to /sbin/resolvconf
> Aug 11 21:59:17 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 avahi-daemon[1518]: Joining mDNS
> multicast group on interface wlan2.IPv6 with address
> fe80::5a94:6bff:fe79:8a68.
> Aug 11 21:59:17 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 avahi-daemon[1518]: New relevant
> interface wlan2.IPv6 for mDNS.
> Aug 11 21:59:17 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 avahi-daemon[1518]: Registering
> new address record for fe80::5a94:6bff:fe79:8a68 on wlan2.*.
> Aug 11 21:59:21 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Activation (wlan2) successful, device activated.
>
> . . . and here's a "good" session:
>
> $ cat /var/log/syslog | grep -e wlan -e iwl -e etwork | tail -n25
> Aug 11 22:01:27 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Â
> address 172.15.255.28
> Aug 11 22:01:27 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Â
> prefix 24 (255.255.255.0)
> Aug 11 22:01:27 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Â
> gateway 172.15.255.1
> Aug 11 22:01:27 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Â
> hostname 'hercynia-ThinkPad-T61'
> Aug 11 22:01:27 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info> Â
> nameserver '172.15.255.1'
> Aug 11 22:01:27 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Activation (wlan2) Stage 5 of 5 (IPv4 Configure Commit) scheduled...
> Aug 11 22:01:27 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Activation (wlan2) Stage 5 of 5 (IPv4 Commit) started...
> Aug 11 22:01:27 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 avahi-daemon[1518]: Joining mDNS
> multicast group on interface wlan2.IPv4 with address 172.15.255.28.
> Aug 11 22:01:27 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 avahi-daemon[1518]: New relevant
> interface wlan2.IPv4 for mDNS.
> Aug 11 22:01:27 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 avahi-daemon[1518]: Registering
> new address record for 172.15.255.28 on wlan2.IPv4.
> Aug 11 22:01:28 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> (wlan2): device state change: ip-config -> secondaries (reason 'none')
> [70 90 0]
> Aug 11 22:01:28 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Activation (wlan2) Stage 5 of 5 (IPv4 Commit) complete.
> Aug 11 22:01:28 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> (wlan2): device state change: secondaries -> activated (reason 'none')
> [90 100 0]
> Aug 11 22:01:28 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> NetworkManager state is now CONNECTED_GLOBAL
> Aug 11 22:01:28 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Policy set 'HOME-2D4F-5' (wlan2) as default for IPv4 routing and DNS.
> Aug 11 22:01:28 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Writing DNS information to /sbin/resolvconf
> Aug 11 22:01:28 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 avahi-daemon[1518]: Joining mDNS
> multicast group on interface wlan2.IPv6 with address
> fe80::5a94:6bff:fe79:8a68.
> Aug 11 22:01:28 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 avahi-daemon[1518]: New relevant
> interface wlan2.IPv6 for mDNS.
> Aug 11 22:01:28 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 avahi-daemon[1518]: Registering
> new address record for fe80::5a94:6bff:fe79:8a68 on wlan2.*.
> Aug 11 22:01:33 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Activation (wlan2) successful, device activated.
> Aug 11 22:01:47 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> (wlan2): IP6 addrconf timed out or failed.
> Aug 11 22:01:47 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Activation (wlan2) Stage 4 of 5 (IPv6 Configure Timeout) scheduled...
> Aug 11 22:01:47 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Activation (wlan2) Stage 4 of 5 (IPv6 Configure Timeout) started...
> Aug 11 22:01:47 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 NetworkManager[1525]: <info>
> Activation (wlan2) Stage 4 of 5 (IPv6 Configure Timeout) complete.
> Aug 11 22:01:48 hercynia-ThinkPad-T61 wpa_supplicant[1714]: wlan2:
> CTRL-EVENT-SCAN-STARTED
>
> I don't know what I'm seeing here. It works sometimes and others it
> doesn't without lots of attempts -- and an "everybody off the Internet!"
> order to all my family.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Kiser, Ryan Lee <rlkiser@iu.edu
> <mailto:rlkiser@iu.edu>> wrote:
>
> One basic question: does it happen anywhere else or just that network?
>
> On Aug 11, 2014 8:12 PM, Mark Warner <mhwarner@gmail.com
> <mailto:mhwarner@gmail.com>> wrote:
> WPA & WPA2 Personal is fine.
>
> Perhaps:
>
> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2190839
>
> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2179576
>
>
> On 08/11/2014 07:27 PM, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
> > I'm on "WPA & WPA2 Personal." There's also "WEP 40/128-bit key"
> and "WEP
> > 128-bit passphrase" and "LEAP" and "Dynamic WEP (802.1x)" and "WPA &
> > WPA2 Enterprise."  Any suggestions?
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Mark Warner <mhwarner@gmail.com
> <mailto:mhwarner@gmail.com>
> > <mailto:mhwarner@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >Â Â Â Â Try changing your wireless encryption. Some chipsets have
> trouble
> >Â Â Â Â with some encryption levels.
> >
> >
> >Â Â Â Â On 08/11/2014 09:41 AM, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
> >
> >Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Actually, it gives every indication that it's up
> and running.
> >Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â The wifi symbol is almost full-strength; however,
> the system
> >Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â monitor app shows weak or no real net traffic
> incoming. This
> >Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â will go on and on with me enabling, disabling,
> rebooting, trying
> >Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Web, ssh, ping. But eventually it will work. I've
> got other
> >Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â family members on Thinkpads (T61, T410) and U14.04
> and they
> >Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â don't have this problem.
> >
> >
> >
> >Â Â Â Â --
> >Â Â Â Â Mark Warner
> >Â Â Â Â MEPIS Linux
> >Â Â Â Â Registered Linux User #415318
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Â Â Â Â _________________________________________________
> >Â Â Â Â BLUG mailing list
> >Â Â Â Â BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> <mailto:BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org> <mailto:BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org>
> >Â Â Â Â http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.__org/mailman/listinfo/blug
> >Â Â Â Â <http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > BLUG mailing list
> > BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org <mailto:BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org>
> > http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
> --
> Mark Warner
> MEPIS Linux
> Registered Linux User #415318
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org <mailto:BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org>
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org <mailto:BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org>
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
> http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug

--
Mark Warner
MEPIS Linux
Registered Linux User #415318




_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@bloomingtonlinux.org
http://lists.bloomingtonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/blug