On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Partha Bagchi wrote: >> >> I am testing RC1. I have to say that using ath9k is more problematic >> than before. Now, I can't get a signal in my backyard, where the >> connection icon shows a 40% signal, ping says destination host is >> unreachable when pinging the router: >> ping 192.168.1.1 >> PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. >>> >>> From 192.168.1.102 icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Unreachable >>> From 192.168.1.102 icmp_seq=3 Destination Host Unreachable >>> From 192.168.1.102 icmp_seq=4 Destination Host Unreachable >> >> ^C >> --- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics --- >> 6 packets transmitted, 0 received, +3 errors, 100% packet loss, time >> 5224ms >> > I believe that you will find this is a rounting problem, and IIRC there is a > default route to the destination, else you would get "no route to host," but > some network node refused to pass the packets, and retuned the ICMP packets > saying so. > > If "netstat -rn" doesn't shed any light on this, use of tcpdump may. I don't > find any useful (to me) information in the rest of this, it is as I expect. > I suppose that you could get this behavior if the route were in place but > the router didn't correctly handle the packets, or wasn't passing icmp. You > comment on "nearer" suggests that. > > My experience has been that other than the fact that the checkbox for > starting a connection at boot is still a decoration rather than a feature, > FC11 is working slightly better than FC10 on my laptops. > > Hope any of this helps. > >> uname -a >> Linux Bordeaux 2.6.29.4-167.fc11.i686.PAE #1 SMP Wed May 27 17:28:22 >> EDT 2009 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux >> >> lspci: >> ... >> 06:00.0 Network controller: Atheros Communications Inc. AR928X >> Wireless Network Adapter (PCI-Express) (rev 01) >> ... >> >> [partha@Bordeaux ~]$ rpm -qa |grep -i network >> NetworkManager-gnome-0.7.1-4.git20090414.fc11.i586 >> NetworkManager-vpnc-0.7.0.99-1.fc11.i586 >> system-config-network-1.5.97-1.fc11.noarch >> NetworkManager-glib-0.7.1-4.git20090414.fc11.i586 >> NetworkManager-openvpn-0.7.0.99-1.fc11.i586 >> system-config-network-tui-1.5.97-1.fc11.noarch >> NetworkManager-0.7.1-4.git20090414.fc11.i586 >> NetworkManager-openconnect-0.7.0.99-4.fc11.i586 >> >> No additional information in /var/log/messages. >> >> Was working fine in Fedora 10 and also, works fine when I am"nearer" >> to the router. Seems to me some sort of regression. >> >> Thanks, >> Partha >> >> >> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 12:22 PM, James Laska <jlaska@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 17:10 +0100, Paul Black wrote: >>>> >>>> 2009/5/28 James Laska wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Where can we get RC1? >>>>> >>>>> I've buried the link under the "What to test" section - >>>>> >>>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Fedora_11_RC1_Install_Test_Results#What_To_Test >>>> >>>> Will these be available via rsync? >>>> >>>> I've tried the instructions here: >>>> >>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pfrields/Building_an_ISO_image_for_testing >>>> and they don't work; "rsync rsync://alt.fedoraproject.org/alt" shows >>>> the stage directory is not present. >>> >>> Sorry, I don't believe these will be available for rsync. My >>> understanding is they are made available for high-bandwith testers to >>> assist with release candidate validation. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> James >>> >>> -- >>> fedora-test-list mailing list >>> fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx >>> To unsubscribe: >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list >>> >> > > > -- > Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx> > "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from > the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot > > -- > fedora-test-list mailing list > fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list > I am not sure I understand what you are saying. Perhaps that is my problem. I don't believe 'netstat -m' exists? What am I looking for here? Also, do you expect the output of tcpdump when I am further away from the router? I should mention that the router is in the basement and I am able to get a fine signal on the ground floor. When I step outside a few feet away that I cannot get a signal. I did not have this problem with Fedora 10, same hardware. Are you familiar with ath9k? Thanks for your help. Partha -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
