From: Denis V. <vd...@il...> - 2005-06-28 14:14:39
|
Hi Andreas, folks, I prepared a little draft email to lkml and other relevant folks. It is below. Please comment. Especially, is this 100.00% true? >Texas Instruments did not take part in development of this driver >in any way, shape or form. I don't want to lie :) I won't sent such mail to anywhere outside acx team before I get your approval. (I think it will be Andreas duty/privilege to send it) DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT We'd like to present ACX, a driver for 802.11b/g wireless cards and USB devices based on Texas Instruments acx100 and acx111 chipsets. People reported success in using this driver with: acx100: dlink_dwl650+ smc_2435w acx111: abocom_wg2400 hawking_hwp54g netgear_wg311v2 safecom_slwc54108 safecom_slwp54108 trendnet_tew421pc usr_5410 xterasys_xn2522g Driver creates a wlanN (pseudo-)ethernet device which can be configured with standard tools (iwconfig and friends, ifconfig, ip, etc). Driver supports ad-hoc, managed and master modes (master mode is a new addition and is not very stable). Also driver supports monitor mode. In monitor mode, driver can send packets of arbitrary contents. This opens up a possibility to use it for non-802.11 radio communication (die ACKs! die!!!). Driver needs a firmware file(s) to operate. Firmware files are not covered by GPL and are not distributed with this driver for legal reasons, but it's semi-trivial to find them on Web in Windows drivers on the hardware vendor sites. Firmware may be in a form of single image around 80kb in size (a 'combined' firmware) or two images - main image (again ~80kb) and radio image (~10kb) which is specific to RF chip used in the device. Firmware images are requested from hotplug using following names: tiacx100 - main firmware image for acx100 chipset tiacx100rNN - radio acx100 firmware for radio type NN tiacx100cNN - combined acx100 firmware for radio type NN tiacx111 - main acx111 firmware tiacx111rNN - radio acx111 firmware for radio type NN tiacx111cNN - combined acx111 firmware for radio type NN Driver will attempt to load combined image first. If no such image is found, it will try to load main image and radio image instead. We do not know much about inner workings of firmware, and this turned out to do more good than bad, because we do not use firmware for much of 802.11 support. For example, ad-hoc and managed mode association is done by simply analysing received packets and replying to them. We can do even better. Complete 802.11 protocol may be realized with this hardware entirely in-kernel, with minimal firmware support (almost exclusively in the form of automatic sending of ACKs). Texas Instruments did not take part in development of this driver in any way, shape or form. -- vda |
From: Carlos M. <car...@gm...> - 2005-06-28 14:56:31
|
On 28/06/05, Denis Vlasenko <vd...@il...> wrote: > Hi Andreas, folks, >=20 > I prepared a little draft email to lkml and other relevant folks. > It is below. Please comment. >=20 > Especially, is this 100.00% true? >=20 > >Texas Instruments did not take part in development of this driver > >in any way, shape or form. >=20 > I don't want to lie :) >=20 > I won't sent such mail to anywhere outside acx team before I get > your approval. (I think it will be Andreas duty/privilege to send it) >=20 > DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT >=20 > We'd like to present ACX, a driver for 802.11b/g > wireless cards and USB devices based on what's the difference between a wireless card and an USB device? ITYM for PCI, CardBus and USB wireless cards/devices/stuff ;). > Texas Instruments acx100 and acx111 chipsets. They have other names as well. I think you can find them in README. It may be good to add them. >=20 > People reported success in using this driver with: >=20 > acx100: > dlink_dwl650+ > smc_2435w Add dlink_dwl120+ (USB) to the list. It works also (or at least it did some releases back) Maybe you could add wether they are CardBus, PCI or USB. > Driver creates a wlanN (pseudo-)ethernet device > which can be configured with standard tools > (iwconfig and friends, ifconfig, ip, etc). Every wi-fi driver does this AFAIK, but feel free. > Driver needs a firmware file(s) to operate. >=20 > Firmware files are not covered by GPL and are not distributed > with this driver for legal reasons, but it's semi-trivial to > find them on Web in Windows drivers on the hardware vendor sites. Didn't D-Link give us permission to distribute the firmware for non-commercial purposes? They could be uploaded to SourceForge, and we could tell people to run a script to download them, or something. --=20 Carlos Mart=EDn http://www.cmartin.tk http://rpgscript.berlios.de Nowadays everyting has infrared and wireless. If it's big enough, it gets Gigabit and a DVD burner. |
From: Denis V. <vd...@il...> - 2005-06-28 15:43:03
|
On Tuesday 28 June 2005 17:56, Carlos Martin wrote: > On 28/06/05, Denis Vlasenko <vd...@il...> wrote: > > Hi Andreas, folks, > > > > I prepared a little draft email to lkml and other relevant folks. > > It is below. Please comment. > > > > Especially, is this 100.00% true? > > > > >Texas Instruments did not take part in development of this driver > > >in any way, shape or form. > > > > I don't want to lie :) > > > > I won't sent such mail to anywhere outside acx team before I get > > your approval. (I think it will be Andreas duty/privilege to send it) > > > > DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT > > > > We'd like to present ACX, a driver for 802.11b/g > > wireless cards and USB devices based on > what's the difference between a wireless card and an USB device? PCI card is inserted into PCI slot and sits inside my box. USB thing is not inside, it is more like a 'plugin'. However 1) I never saw USB network devices in real life yet, 2) English is not my native language so please offer you thoughts in the form of complete sentences or even paragraphs to be added or replaced in the draft. It's hard to understand what do you propose otherwise. > ITYM for PCI, CardBus and USB wireless cards/devices/stuff ;). > > Texas Instruments acx100 and acx111 chipsets. > They have other names as well. I think you can find them in README. It > may be good to add them. Sensible. ...based on Texas Instruments acx100 and acx111 chipsets, also known as TNETW1100/TNETW1100B and TNETW1130/TNETW1230. Like this? > > dlink_dwl650+ > > smc_2435w > Add dlink_dwl120+ (USB) to the list. It works also (or at least it did > some releases back) > Maybe you could add wether they are CardBus, PCI or USB. acx100: dlink_dwl120+ (USB) dlink_dwl650+ (PCI) --- although my entry for it seems to be botched (all photos are DWL520+!) smc_2435w (Cardbus) acx111: abocom_wg2400 (Cardbus) hawking_hwp54g (PCI) netgear_wg311v2 (PCI) safecom_slwc54108 (Cardbus) safecom_slwp54108 (PCI) trendnet_tew421pc (Cardbus) usr_5410 (Cardbus) xterasys_xn2522g (PCI) Ok? > > Driver creates a wlanN (pseudo-)ethernet device > > which can be configured with standard tools > > (iwconfig and friends, ifconfig, ip, etc). > > Every wi-fi driver does this AFAIK, but feel free. > > > Driver needs a firmware file(s) to operate. > > > > Firmware files are not covered by GPL and are not distributed > > with this driver for legal reasons, but it's semi-trivial to > > find them on Web in Windows drivers on the hardware vendor sites. > > Didn't D-Link give us permission to distribute the firmware for > non-commercial purposes? They could be uploaded to SourceForge, and we > could tell people to run a script to download them, or something. I do not remember this. Anyone? -- vda |
From: Marcelo B. <mo...@mo...> - 2005-06-28 20:35:51
|
> acx100: > dlink_dwl120+ (USB) > dlink_dwl650+ (PCI) --- although my entry for it seems to be botched (all photos are DWL520+!) > smc_2435w (Cardbus) > acx111: > abocom_wg2400 (Cardbus) > hawking_hwp54g (PCI) > netgear_wg311v2 (PCI) > safecom_slwc54108 (Cardbus) > safecom_slwp54108 (PCI) > trendnet_tew421pc (Cardbus) > usr_5410 (Cardbus) > xterasys_xn2522g (PCI) I have a LG LWG-5400P pci based acx111 card, and it works. |
From: subbu <su...@it...> - 2005-06-28 16:22:57
|
hi, I have D-Link 520+ wireless card and it is also working fine. You can include this one if no one complains about it. I couldn't find problems in operating this card. If anybody know problems about this card please reply back. subbu Denis Vlasenko wrote: >On Tuesday 28 June 2005 17:56, Carlos Martin wrote: > > >>On 28/06/05, Denis Vlasenko <vd...@il...> wrote: >> >> >>>Hi Andreas, folks, >>> >>>I prepared a little draft email to lkml and other relevant folks. >>>It is below. Please comment. >>> >>>Especially, is this 100.00% true? >>> >>> >>> >>>>Texas Instruments did not take part in development of this driver >>>>in any way, shape or form. >>>> >>>> >>>I don't want to lie :) >>> >>>I won't sent such mail to anywhere outside acx team before I get >>>your approval. (I think it will be Andreas duty/privilege to send it) >>> >>>DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT >>> >>>We'd like to present ACX, a driver for 802.11b/g >>>wireless cards and USB devices based on >>> >>> > > > >>what's the difference between a wireless card and an USB device? >> >> > >PCI card is inserted into PCI slot and sits inside my box. >USB thing is not inside, it is more like a 'plugin'. >However 1) I never saw USB network devices in real life yet, >2) English is not my native language so please offer >you thoughts in the form of complete sentences or >even paragraphs to be added or replaced in the draft. > >It's hard to understand what do you propose otherwise. > > > >>ITYM for PCI, CardBus and USB wireless cards/devices/stuff ;). >> >> > > > >>>Texas Instruments acx100 and acx111 chipsets. >>> >>> > > > >>They have other names as well. I think you can find them in README. It >>may be good to add them. >> >> > >Sensible. > >...based on Texas Instruments acx100 and acx111 chipsets, also known >as TNETW1100/TNETW1100B and TNETW1130/TNETW1230. > >Like this? > > > >>> dlink_dwl650+ >>> smc_2435w >>> >>> >>Add dlink_dwl120+ (USB) to the list. It works also (or at least it did >>some releases back) >>Maybe you could add wether they are CardBus, PCI or USB. >> >> > >acx100: > dlink_dwl120+ (USB) > dlink_dwl650+ (PCI) --- although my entry for it seems to be botched (all photos are DWL520+!) > smc_2435w (Cardbus) >acx111: > abocom_wg2400 (Cardbus) > hawking_hwp54g (PCI) > netgear_wg311v2 (PCI) > safecom_slwc54108 (Cardbus) > safecom_slwp54108 (PCI) > trendnet_tew421pc (Cardbus) > usr_5410 (Cardbus) > xterasys_xn2522g (PCI) > >Ok? > > > >>>Driver creates a wlanN (pseudo-)ethernet device >>>which can be configured with standard tools >>>(iwconfig and friends, ifconfig, ip, etc). >>> >>> >>Every wi-fi driver does this AFAIK, but feel free. >> >> >> >>>Driver needs a firmware file(s) to operate. >>> >>>Firmware files are not covered by GPL and are not distributed >>>with this driver for legal reasons, but it's semi-trivial to >>>find them on Web in Windows drivers on the hardware vendor sites. >>> >>> >>Didn't D-Link give us permission to distribute the firmware for >>non-commercial purposes? They could be uploaded to SourceForge, and we >>could tell people to run a script to download them, or something. >> >> > >I do not remember this. Anyone? >-- >vda > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies >from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, >informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to >speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click >_______________________________________________ >Acx100-devel mailing list >Acx...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/acx100-devel > > > |
From: Paul W. <u32...@an...> - 2005-06-29 04:51:43
|
subbu wrote: > hi, > > I have D-Link 520+ wireless card and it is also working fine. You can > include this one if no one complains about it. > > I couldn't find problems in operating this card. If anybody know > problems about this card please reply back. > > subbu > I also have a D-Link g520+, it doesn't seem to work reliably. ubuntu, debian, and gentoo all have trouble configuring the driver on boot, and I manually have to do: iwconfig wlan0 mode managed iwconfig wlan0 essid Waza_ iwconfig wlan0 key KEY_IN_HEX open ifconfig wlan0 up dhcpcd -d wlan0 for it to work. Then, after ~6hours of 30-40k downloads, the card stops working and I have to rmmod, modprobe and then do the above again. Other than those two issues, it works well, WEP works. But I'm still using ndiswrapper mostly, because it _just works_ add ndiswrapper to /etc/modules, and ubuntu takes care of the rest. Cheers -- Paul Warren Information Infrastructure Services ANU SuperComputer Facility Leonard Huxley, Rm 338 u3292467 at anu dot edu dot au pwarren.homelinux.org ph: 612 51432 |
From: Denis V. <vd...@il...> - 2005-06-29 06:06:00
|
On Tuesday 28 June 2005 19:19, subbu wrote: > hi, > > I have D-Link 520+ wireless card and it is also working fine. You can > include this one if no one complains about it. > > I couldn't find problems in operating this card. If anybody know > problems about this card please reply back. Uh, which firmware do you use? At http://195.66.192.167/linux/acx100/acx1xx.htm I have only one acx100 firmware listed, I'd like to expand acx100 section. -- vda |
From: Denis V. <vd...@il...> - 2005-06-29 06:11:36
|
On Wednesday 29 June 2005 07:51, Paul Warren wrote: > subbu wrote: > > hi, > > > > I have D-Link 520+ wireless card and it is also working fine. You can > > include this one if no one complains about it. > > > > I couldn't find problems in operating this card. If anybody know > > problems about this card please reply back. > > > > subbu > > I also have a D-Link g520+, it doesn't seem to work reliably. ubuntu, > debian, and gentoo all have trouble configuring the driver on boot, and > I manually have to do: > > iwconfig wlan0 mode managed > iwconfig wlan0 essid Waza_ > iwconfig wlan0 key KEY_IN_HEX open > ifconfig wlan0 up > dhcpcd -d wlan0 > > for it to work. This is not a problem, you (and everybody else) need to configure your device. If distros do not automate that for you in a Control Center or whatever, that's a problem with distro. > Then, after ~6hours of 30-40k downloads, the card stops working and I > have to rmmod, modprobe and then do the above again. Now, this is bad. Guys, can you give more details? Firmware versions, modprobe time kernel logs with debug=0xffff, etc... (I managed to make my acx111 work for the very first time by exchanging emails with someone who had it already working. Consider doing the same). > Other than those two issues, it works well, WEP works. But I'm still > using ndiswrapper mostly, because it _just works_ add ndiswrapper to > /etc/modules, and ubuntu takes care of the rest. Bad boy. ;) -- vda |
From: Christophe T. <chr...@us...> - 2005-06-29 07:53:11
|
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Denis Vlasenko <vd...@il...> wrote: > > > I also have a D-Link g520+, it doesn't seem to work reliably. ubuntu, > > debian, and gentoo all have trouble configuring the driver on boot, and > > I manually have to do: > > > > iwconfig wlan0 mode managed > > iwconfig wlan0 essid Waza_ > > iwconfig wlan0 key KEY_IN_HEX open > > ifconfig wlan0 up > > dhcpcd -d wlan0 > > > > for it to work. > > This is not a problem, you (and everybody else) need to configure > your device. If distros do not automate that for you in a Control Center > or whatever, that's a problem with distro. In Debian, you can set these parameters in /etc/network/interfaces : iface wlan0 inet dhcp wireless_essid Waza_ wireless_rate auto wireless_mode managed wireless_channel YOUR_CHANNEL wireless_key YOUR_KEY You also have a package "ifscheme" that allows you to easily switch between different networks. If /etc/network/interfaces contains mapping wlan0 script ifscheme-mapping iface wlan0-office inet dhcp CONFIG iface wlan0-home inet dhcp CONFIG you can change by issuing "ifscheme office" or "ifscheme home" (you obviously can have more than two). Hope it helps, ChriS |
From: Andreas M. <an...@us...> - 2005-06-28 17:00:40
|
Hi, On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 05:14:18PM +0300, Denis Vlasenko wrote: > Hi Andreas, folks, > > I prepared a little draft email to lkml and other relevant folks. > It is below. Please comment. > > Especially, is this 100.00% true? > > >Texas Instruments did not take part in development of this driver > >in any way, shape or form. > > I don't want to lie :) Yup, that's 100% true. Well, maybe it's not: you could say that they hindered efforts by never usefully responding to anything and thus wasting time of some people. > I won't sent such mail to anywhere outside acx team before I get > your approval. (I think it will be Andreas duty/privilege to send it) Well, problem is that you will not get my approval in the (very) near future ;) I think we should make sure that all implementations (ACX100, ACX111 and ACX100 USB) are working relatively well, i.e. basic operation does work without OOPS, on x86, AMD64(!) and PPC. Once that is done and the USB implementation is cleanly semi-separated (as much separation as required for a clean kbuild, and as much cooperation as possible) such a mail could be sent. But given your incredible development speed I'm confident that this will take a couple of hours in total to finish ;) > DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT * DRAFT > > We'd like to present ACX, a driver for 802.11b/g > wireless cards and USB devices based on > Texas Instruments acx100 and acx111 chipsets. > > People reported success in using this driver with: > > acx100: > dlink_dwl650+ > smc_2435w > acx111: > abocom_wg2400 > hawking_hwp54g > netgear_wg311v2 > safecom_slwc54108 > safecom_slwp54108 > trendnet_tew421pc > usr_5410 > xterasys_xn2522g Nope, no good. It should refer to my device matrix page and only list the *major* card brands/types here (i.e. dlink, usr, netgear, few others). Something like: acx100: dlink... usr... many other cards acx111: dlink... ... many other cards For a big listing of those other cards, visit http://acx100.sourceforge.net/matrix.html > Firmware images are requested from hotplug using following names: > > tiacx100 - main firmware image for acx100 chipset > tiacx100rNN - radio acx100 firmware for radio type NN > tiacx100cNN - combined acx100 firmware for radio type NN > tiacx111 - main acx111 firmware > tiacx111rNN - radio acx111 firmware for radio type NN > tiacx111cNN - combined acx111 firmware for radio type NN Hmmmmmmm. While this is a clean way to name those images ("ti" CHIP_TYPE "..."), I'm not sure whether we want to change it that fundamentally. > Driver will attempt to load combined image first. > If no such image is found, it will try to load main image > and radio image instead. Hmm, given that this is a much cleaner way of doing things in the driver, I'd say we probably should do it. I'm not fully certain about this exact naming scheme yet, though. > We do not know much about inner workings of firmware, > and this turned out to do more good than bad, because > we do not use firmware for much of 802.11 support. > For example, ad-hoc and managed mode association > is done by simply analysing received packets > and replying to them. > > We can do even better. Complete 802.11 protocol may be > realized with this hardware entirely in-kernel, with > minimal firmware support (almost exclusively in the form > of automatic sending of ACKs). > > Texas Instruments did not take part in development of this driver > in any way, shape or form. Good. Andreas Mohr |
From: Denis V. <vd...@il...> - 2005-06-29 05:59:50
|
> > Especially, is this 100.00% true? > > > > >Texas Instruments did not take part in development of this driver > > >in any way, shape or form. > > > > I don't want to lie :) > > Yup, that's 100% true. Well, maybe it's not: you could say that they hindered > efforts by never usefully responding to anything and thus wasting time of some people. "Texas Instruments took part in development of this driver by never usefully responding to anything and thus wasting time of some people." Hope this is sarcastic enough. >B] > > I won't sent such mail to anywhere outside acx team before I get > > your approval. (I think it will be Andreas duty/privilege to send it) > > Well, problem is that you will not get my approval in the (very) near future ;) > > I think we should make sure that all implementations (ACX100, ACX111 and ACX100 USB) > are working relatively well, i.e. basic operation does work without OOPS, > on x86, AMD64(!) and PPC. > > Once that is done and the USB implementation is cleanly semi-separated (as > much separation as required for a clean kbuild, and as much cooperation as possible) USB already builds cleanly and modprobes for me (tho it does not say much since there is no hw for it to drive). I looked through USB part and it is not _that_ bad. However locking is most probably incorrect. I need a guinea pig. I will clean up and 'fix' USB anyway and undoubtedly it will break horribly due to small bug slipping in ;) > > acx100: > > dlink_dwl650+ > > smc_2435w > > acx111: > > abocom_wg2400 > > hawking_hwp54g > > netgear_wg311v2 > > safecom_slwc54108 > > safecom_slwp54108 > > trendnet_tew421pc > > usr_5410 > > xterasys_xn2522g > Nope, no good. > > It should refer to my device matrix page and only list the *major* card brands/types > here (i.e. dlink, usr, netgear, few others). > > Something like: > acx100: > dlink... > usr... > many other cards > acx111: > dlink... > ... > many other cards > > For a big listing of those other cards, visit http://acx100.sourceforge.net/matrix.html > > > Firmware images are requested from hotplug using following names: > > > > tiacx100 - main firmware image for acx100 chipset > > tiacx100rNN - radio acx100 firmware for radio type NN > > tiacx100cNN - combined acx100 firmware for radio type NN > > tiacx111 - main acx111 firmware > > tiacx111rNN - radio acx111 firmware for radio type NN > > tiacx111cNN - combined acx111 firmware for radio type NN > > Hmmmmmmm. > While this is a clean way to name those images ("ti" CHIP_TYPE "..."), > I'm not sure whether we want to change it that fundamentally. I'm afraid we have no choice. Under current naming it is impossible to have two combined firmwares, one for radio16 and one for radio17 acx111 card, because they both must be named TIACX111.BIN. But people _can_ have two different PCI cards, right? > > Driver will attempt to load combined image first. > > If no such image is found, it will try to load main image > > and radio image instead. > > Hmm, given that this is a much cleaner way of doing things in the > driver, I'd say we probably should do it. > I'm not fully certain about this exact naming scheme yet, though. Since we have to change it anyway, it will be better to do it so that it breaks for everybody (or else people will send bogus bug reports just because suddenly they loaded wrong firmware but didn't notice that). Thus I picked a scheme where names are all lowercase (UNIX tradition) and dropped .bin suffix. Basically I mimicked prism54 - they call their firmware "isl1390" or something like that. I do not want to diverge much form the only other mainline 11g driver on which I aslo worked a bit. Anyway, change should happen at kernel inclusion time, not earlier. We dont want people to suffer needlessly. Comments? -- vda |
From: Carlos M. <car...@gm...> - 2005-06-28 17:01:31
|
On 28/06/05, Denis Vlasenko <vd...@il...> wrote: > > what's the difference between a wireless card and an USB device? >=20 > PCI card is inserted into PCI slot and sits inside my box. > USB thing is not inside, it is more like a 'plugin'. Actually more like an add-on. > However 1) I never saw USB network devices in real life yet, Search for DWL-120+ on google and you'll see some pics. > 2) English is not my native language so please offer > you thoughts in the form of complete sentences or > even paragraphs to be added or replaced in the draft. >=20 > It's hard to understand what do you propose otherwise. Sorry for the way of saying it. It's not clear what I mean. The way you say it it sounds (at least to me) like the USB devices are not wireless devices. I would write something like: ---------8<------------8<----- We'd like to present ACX, a driver for (Mini-)PCI/CardBus wireless cards and USB wireless devices based on... ---------8<------------8<----- Now that I read your paragraph again it makes much more sense than the first time, but it bothers me that it could be interpreted as though the USB devices weren't wireless. I don't know if I make myself clear. You can keep the old one, I'd just add 'wireless' in front of 'USB devices' and that we also support Mini-PCI (That's just PCI built-in to a notebook). > ...based on Texas Instruments acx100 and acx111 chipsets, also known > as TNETW1100/TNETW1100B and TNETW1130/TNETW1230. >=20 > Like this? Looks good.=20 > acx100: > dlink_dwl120+ (USB) > dlink_dwl650+ (PCI) --- although my entry for it seems to be botched = (all photos are DWL520+!) The DWL-520+ is PCI, the 650+ is CardBus (and maybe mini-PCI, I think that's the one Andreas had at the beginning) > smc_2435w (Cardbus) > acx111: > abocom_wg2400 (Cardbus) > hawking_hwp54g (PCI) > netgear_wg311v2 (PCI) > safecom_slwc54108 (Cardbus) > safecom_slwp54108 (PCI) > trendnet_tew421pc (Cardbus) > usr_5410 (Cardbus) > xterasys_xn2522g (PCI) >=20 > Ok? Yep, it now looks more informative. > > > Driver creates a wlanN (pseudo-)ethernet device > > > which can be configured with standard tools > > > (iwconfig and friends, ifconfig, ip, etc). > > > > Every wi-fi driver does this AFAIK, but feel free. > > > > > Driver needs a firmware file(s) to operate. > > > > > > Firmware files are not covered by GPL and are not distributed > > > with this driver for legal reasons, but it's semi-trivial to > > > find them on Web in Windows drivers on the hardware vendor sites. > > > > Didn't D-Link give us permission to distribute the firmware for > > non-commercial purposes? They could be uploaded to SourceForge, and we > > could tell people to run a script to download them, or something. >=20 > I do not remember this. Anyone? I got a bit confused. We didn't get it, Christian Kirbach got it for his Debian howto and he was going to talk to D-Link about wether we could also use it or not. He was going to get back to us. That was back in December. Maybe it would be time to ask him if he's managed to get anything done.=20 http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=3D6130197&forum_id= =3D31812 cmn --=20 Carlos Mart=EDn http://www.cmartin.tk http://rpgscript.berlios.de Nowadays everyting has infrared and wireless. If it's big enough, it gets Gigabit and a DVD burner. |
From: Andreas M. <an...@us...> - 2005-06-28 17:13:05
|
Hi, On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 07:01:15PM +0200, Carlos Martin wrote: > The DWL-520+ is PCI, the 650+ is CardBus (and maybe mini-PCI, I think > that's the one Andreas had at the beginning) Yup, indeed. I *think* the best way would be to simply list only the most common card for all bus and chip types and refer to the matrix for everything else. Keep the mail short, ya know... > > > > Driver needs a firmware file(s) to operate. > > > > > > > > Firmware files are not covered by GPL and are not distributed > > > > with this driver for legal reasons, but it's semi-trivial to > > > > find them on Web in Windows drivers on the hardware vendor sites. > > > > > > Didn't D-Link give us permission to distribute the firmware for > > > non-commercial purposes? They could be uploaded to SourceForge, and we > > > could tell people to run a script to download them, or something. > > > > I do not remember this. Anyone? > I got a bit confused. We didn't get it, Christian Kirbach got it for > his Debian howto and he was going to talk to D-Link about wether we > could also use it or not. He was going to get back to us. That was > back in December. > Maybe it would be time to ask him if he's managed to get anything done. > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=6130197&forum_id=31812 Uh, yup, D-Link Germany was *very* cooperative in this respect, but they finally didn't do the last and hardest part of the permission: to research it fully and legally (which is understandable since everything Legalese is a big headache waiting for you). So we *do* have a verbal permission to distribute it, with the "slight" flaw that it's most likely not a legally binding contract. Since it's thus uncertain, I decided to still not directly redistribute the D-Link firmware files in our project, especially since they're available everywhere (and if they happened to become unavailable then we could still distribute our copies at that time). It could have been part of an evil plot to agree as much as causing us distribute their firmware files and then getting down hard on us since we started shipping them without having a REAL agreement. (just joking, man! ;) Now going back to merging driver patches... Andreas Mohr -- No programming skills!? Why not help translate many Linux applications! https://launchpad.ubuntu.com/rosetta |
From: Denis V. <vd...@il...> - 2005-06-29 06:03:37
|
On Tuesday 28 June 2005 20:13, Andreas Mohr wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 07:01:15PM +0200, Carlos Martin wrote: > > The DWL-520+ is PCI, the 650+ is CardBus (and maybe mini-PCI, I think > > that's the one Andreas had at the beginning) > > Yup, indeed. > > I *think* the best way would be to simply list only the most common card for all > bus and chip types and refer to the matrix for everything else. > Keep the mail short, ya know... Well, in this case we are better make this mail _convincing_. Card list tells that this stuff works for more than 3 people :) -- vda |
From: subbu <su...@it...> - 2005-06-29 05:15:26
|
Paul Warren wrote: >subbu wrote: > > >>hi, >> >>I have D-Link 520+ wireless card and it is also working fine. You can >>include this one if no one complains about it. >> >>I couldn't find problems in operating this card. If anybody know >>problems about this card please reply back. >> >>subbu >> >> >> > >I also have a D-Link g520+, it doesn't seem to work reliably. ubuntu, > > I don't know about D-Link g520+. But i am using the card D-Link 520+ card shown in http://support.dlink.com/products/view.asp?productid=DWL%2D520%2B It is a 22Mbps card. And I am using Debian(sarge) and i don't have any trouble on boot . I am able to configure my network by using DHCP server also. But i haven't checked the automatic association to an access point when you move towards another one as it is PCI card. But it is selecting the best access points available within its range and there are at least 8 access points within the vicinity of the card. If we both are using the same card then you should be able to get it also. >debian, and gentoo all have trouble configuring the driver on boot, and >I manually have to do: > >iwconfig wlan0 mode managed >iwconfig wlan0 essid Waza_ >iwconfig wlan0 key KEY_IN_HEX open >ifconfig wlan0 up >dhcpcd -d wlan0 > >for it to work. > >Then, after ~6hours of 30-40k downloads, the card stops working and I >have to rmmod, modprobe and then do the above again. > >Other than those two issues, it works well, WEP works. But I'm still >using ndiswrapper mostly, because it _just works_ add ndiswrapper to >/etc/modules, and ubuntu takes care of the rest. > >Cheers > > |
From: Paul W. <u32...@an...> - 2005-06-29 05:37:16
|
> I don't know about D-Link g520+. But i am using the card D-Link 520+ > card shown in > http://support.dlink.com/products/view.asp?productid=DWL%2D520%2B > > It is a 22Mbps card. And I am using Debian(sarge) and i don't have any > trouble on boot . > I am able to configure my network by using DHCP server also. But i > haven't checked the automatic association > to an access point when you move towards another one as it is PCI card. > But it is selecting the best access points > available within its range and there are at least 8 access points within > the vicinity of the card. If we both are using > the same card then you should be able to get it also. Indeed, different cards, mine has 54M(802.11g) The g520 (no plus) is different again, using the atheros chipset for 802.11g. Aaargh! -- Paul Warren Information Infrastructure Services ANU SuperComputer Facility Leonard Huxley, Rm 338 u3292467 at anu dot edu dot au pwarren.homelinux.org ph: 612 51481 |
From: Denis V. <vd...@il...> - 2005-06-29 06:31:21
|
On Wednesday 29 June 2005 08:36, Paul Warren wrote: > > > I don't know about D-Link g520+. But i am using the card D-Link 520+ > > card shown in > > http://support.dlink.com/products/view.asp?productid=DWL%2D520%2B > > > > It is a 22Mbps card. And I am using Debian(sarge) and i don't have any > > trouble on boot . > > I am able to configure my network by using DHCP server also. But i > > haven't checked the automatic association > > to an access point when you move towards another one as it is PCI card. > > But it is selecting the best access points > > available within its range and there are at least 8 access points within > > the vicinity of the card. If we both are using > > the same card then you should be able to get it also. > > Indeed, different cards, mine has 54M(802.11g) Dropout after some time is known with firmware 0.1.0.11 If you use that one, upgrade it. -- vda |