Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   Cisco (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f27-cisco.html)
-   -   Re: AP4800 Config HELP !!! (Attn Dan Lanciani) (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t29075-re-ap4800-config-help-attn-dan-lanciani.html)

Dave 07-14-2003 10:21 PM

Re: AP4800 Config HELP !!! (Attn Dan Lanciani)
 
Hi Dan,

Thanks for your reply regarding this problem, your diagnosis was 100% on the
nose, I changed the encapsulation and all is now working, I just need to
find some where now that tells me what the difference is between the two so
I can understand why it did what it did (or didn't as the case may be), I
hate having a fix for something if I don't understand it, anyway, thanks
again you prevented a lot of head scratching.

Cheers

Dave.



Ed Clarke 07-15-2003 02:15 AM

Re: AP4800 Config HELP !!! (Attn Dan Lanciani)
 
In article <beva7u$9b5rp$1@ID-185896.news.uni-berlin.de>, Dave wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> Thanks for your reply regarding this problem, your diagnosis was 100% on the
> nose, I changed the encapsulation and all is now working, I just need to
> find some where now that tells me what the difference is between the two so
> I can understand why it did what it did (or didn't as the case may be), I
> hate having a fix for something if I don't understand it, anyway, thanks
> again you prevented a lot of head scratching.


It fixed a problem here as well. All my equipment is Cisco except for a
new IBM R31 Thinkpad. I thought the R31 wireless card was bad; changing the
encapsulation fixed the problem - and the Cisco equipment continued to work
without any glitches.

Dan Lanciani 07-15-2003 03:46 AM

Re: AP4800 Config HELP !!! (Attn Dan Lanciani)
 
In article <slrnbh6otf.3d4.clarke@FONGULATOR.watson.ibm.com >, clarke@cilia.org (Ed Clarke) writes:
| In article <beva7u$9b5rp$1@ID-185896.news.uni-berlin.de>, Dave wrote:
| > Hi Dan,
| >
| > Thanks for your reply regarding this problem, your diagnosis was 100% on the
| > nose, I changed the encapsulation and all is now working, I just need to
| > find some where now that tells me what the difference is between the two so
| > I can understand why it did what it did (or didn't as the case may be), I
| > hate having a fix for something if I don't understand it, anyway, thanks
| > again you prevented a lot of head scratching.
|
| It fixed a problem here as well. All my equipment is Cisco except for a
| new IBM R31 Thinkpad. I thought the R31 wireless card was bad; changing the
| encapsulation fixed the problem - and the Cisco equipment continued to work
| without any glitches.

Aironet clients automatically pick up the encapsulation rules used by the
access point or bridge (as long as you do not turn off Aironet extensions).
They really did the best they could with a bad situation. Their only fault
was not guessing the best "default default." (Actually, they were on their
way to fixing that. They changed the client default to conform to the market
a while ago. And the AP does know that if you turn off Aironet extensions it
should revert the default to RFC1042...)

Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.