«

I know this is a shot in the dark, but would anyone happen to have the 3.xx
and 4.xx firmwares for pre-Cisco Aironet AP4800 AP? Thanx for any help.

My apologies...plz respond to texas<at>vfemail.net

"DJ Allen gmail.com>" <texas<at> wrote in message
news:tfOdnZwYWaYYe77fRVn-...
>I know this is a shot in the dark, but would anyone happen to have the 3.xx
>and 4.xx firmwares for pre-Cisco Aironet AP4800 AP? Thanx for any help.
>

In article <itqdnbHYFfCKer7fRVn->, at (DJ Allen) writes:
| My apologies...plz respond to texas<at>vfemail.net

Doesn't work...

| "DJ Allen gmail.com>" <texas<at> wrote in message
| news:tfOdnZwYWaYYe77fRVn-...
| >I know this is a shot in the dark, but would anyone happen to have the 3.xx
| >and 4.xx firmwares for pre-Cisco Aironet AP4800 AP? Thanx for any help.

Did 4.x even exist for the AP4800? I bought one when they first came out
and it used with 6.x (which I still have). The 3000 series had 4.x, though.

Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com

I'm going to have to claim ignorance...a friend has a couple that he wants
to upgrade to latest Cisco 340 8.xx but says he needs 3.xx and 4.xx to get
there (?) I should have done a little more research, thanks for the info.
Can you send me the 6.x you have? If so, plz send to texas<at>vfemail.net.
Rgds, Dennis


"Dan Lanciani" <ddl@danlan.*com> wrote in message
news:...
> In article <itqdnbHYFfCKer7fRVn->, at (DJ Allen) writes:
> | My apologies...plz respond to texas<at>vfemail.net
>
> Doesn't work...
>
> | "DJ Allen gmail.com>" <texas<at> wrote in message
> | news:tfOdnZwYWaYYe77fRVn-...
> | >I know this is a shot in the dark, but would anyone happen to have the
> 3.xx
> | >and 4.xx firmwares for pre-Cisco Aironet AP4800 AP? Thanx for any help.
>
> Did 4.x even exist for the AP4800? I bought one when they first came out
> and it used with 6.x (which I still have). The 3000 series had 4.x,
> though.
>
> Dan Lanciani
> ddl@danlan.*com

DJ Allen <texas schrieb:

> I'm going to have to claim ignorance...a friend has a couple that he wants
> to upgrade to latest Cisco 340 8.xx but says he needs 3.xx and 4.xx to get
> there (?) I should have done a little more research, thanks for the info.

When Cisco aquired Aironet the 4800B was brand new.
The Cisco 340 is nearly equal the 4800B. A 50MHz PowerPC860 CPU with
16MB SDRAM and 2 MByte flash. They run VxWorks.

The older 4800 (same chassis than 3500 and 4500) has some weird
restriction, it used a pre standard 11MBit mode. The radio was only able
to WEP encrypt at 1 or 2 MBit rates. It lacks the ability of a short
preamble. The case is large (same case than a 340 Bridge!)
The CPU is a Motorola 68020 at 25Mhz. The AP boots in few seconds. The
browser GUI is blue, red and white.

The latest fw is 8.80 (which support an LMC352) as radio and I don't
know any reason why to use a version older 8.24_2

--
Uli

These opinions are mine. All found typos are yours.

In article <A76dnWWjG4VmHLnfRVn->, at (DJ Allen) writes:
| I'm going to have to claim ignorance...a friend has a couple that he wants
| to upgrade to latest Cisco 340 8.xx

This doesn't make a lot of sense unless he is talking about the 340 *bridge*
series which in fact is the same hardware platform as the AP4800E. The 340
access point family didn't have version numbers in those ranges that I recall.

| but says he needs 3.xx and 4.xx to get
| there (?)

Regardless of the platform I can't think of a reason for that. Is he
trying to convert an access point to a bridge? There was a story about
the 630 series that claimed you could do such by running through a set
of about six old firmware versions. It's possible that it worked (I never
checked because I found much easier ways to convert an access point to a
bridge) since the firmware does fudge the device type in some cases if
it doesn't have a matching table entry. I'm pretty sure that it will not
work for the AP4800E.

| I should have done a little more research, thanks for the info.
| Can you send me the 6.x you have? If so, plz send to texas<at>vfemail.net.

That address does not work.

Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com

In article <4224bda2$0$26554$>, (Uli Link) writes:
| DJ Allen <texas schrieb:
|
| > I'm going to have to claim ignorance...a friend has a couple that he wants
| > to upgrade to latest Cisco 340 8.xx but says he needs 3.xx and 4.xx to get
| > there (?) I should have done a little more research, thanks for the info.
|
| When Cisco aquired Aironet the 4800B was brand new.
| The Cisco 340 is nearly equal the 4800B. A 50MHz PowerPC860 CPU with
| 16MB SDRAM and 2 MByte flash. They run VxWorks.
|
| The older 4800 (same chassis than 3500 and 4500) has some weird
| restriction, it used a pre standard 11MBit mode.

That wasn't a problem--even the oldest 4800 series radio cards supported
standard CCK modulation for 11 & 5.5 Mb/s rates with the right firmware.
(The non-standard mode was MOK.)

| The radio was only able
| to WEP encrypt at 1 or 2 MBit rates.

That was a problem, but it was solely the fault of the radio card. Sadly,
Aironet seemed to have some sort of marketing policy to keep this a secret.
When you called to ask why your nearly-new AP4800E couldn't do WEP at 11 Mb/s
they told you that it was a hardware problem with the chassis and that you
needed to "upgrade" (where "upgrade" meant to toss the AP4800E and buy new)
to an AP4800B series with its low-power 35mW radio and all sorts of silly
license key management. All you really needed to do was replace the radio
card with an LM4800A (a 100mW card with an A503 cpu just like the B series)...
if you could find one. In fact, Aironet (and then Cisco) shipped AP4800Es
(and BR342s which are the identical hardware) with LM4800As for years to
support customers who demanded 100mW solutions. Cisco even shipped LM4800As
by themselves after the 350 series was introduced; I'm not sure why.

| It lacks the ability of a short
| preamble.

That is unfortunately true of even the LM4800A. Of course, there are some
advantages to long preambles (diversity selection).

| The case is large (same case than a 340 Bridge!)

Same case, same hardware, same everything. (Ok, the bridge doesn't
being out both antenna connections.)

| The CPU is a Motorola 68020 at 25Mhz. The AP boots in few seconds. The
| browser GUI is blue, red and white.
|
| The latest fw is 8.80 (which support an LMC352) as radio and I don't

8.81 seems to be floating around.

| know any reason why to use a version older 8.24_2

Another good version to hang onto is 8.65_2. This was the last version
that included card firmware that was compatible with the LM4500 and the
original (non-A) LM4800 (anything newer breaks WEP support on the card).
But unlike 8.24, the card firmware in 8.65 does not require the masterky
upgrade bits to be set to support 128-bit WEP.

Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com

>>That address does not work.>>>>

Hi Dan,

It's my main email account (been working al day!)... replace "<at>" with @
.... texas@vfemail.*net as you have yours listed for spam evasion. I've done
a bit more research and found that to get an Aironet AP4800 to load Cisco
340 8.xx fw, I must upgrade incrementally from 3.xx...been told this is true
for any fw below 7.xx. Question: will flashing up to 8.xx fix the bandwidth
limitation when using WEP encryption? Thanks for the help!

Dennis Allen




"Dan Lanciani" <ddl@danlan.*com> wrote in message
news:...
> In article <A76dnWWjG4VmHLnfRVn->, at (DJ Allen) writes:
> | I'm going to have to claim ignorance...a friend has a couple that he
> wants
> | to upgrade to latest Cisco 340 8.xx
>
> This doesn't make a lot of sense unless he is talking about the 340
> *bridge*
> series which in fact is the same hardware platform as the AP4800E. The
> 340
> access point family didn't have version numbers in those ranges that I
> recall.
>
> | but says he needs 3.xx and 4.xx to get
> | there (?)
>
> Regardless of the platform I can't think of a reason for that. Is he
> trying to convert an access point to a bridge? There was a story about
> the 630 series that claimed you could do such by running through a set
> of about six old firmware versions. It's possible that it worked (I never
> checked because I found much easier ways to convert an access point to a
> bridge) since the firmware does fudge the device type in some cases if
> it doesn't have a matching table entry. I'm pretty sure that it will not
> work for the AP4800E.
>
> | I should have done a little more research, thanks for the info.
> | Can you send me the 6.x you have? If so, plz send to
> texas<at>vfemail.net.
>
> That address does not work.
>
> Dan Lanciani
> ddl@danlan.*com

In article <FdadnXOc2MVfhbjfRVn->, at (DJ Allen) writes:
| >>That address does not work.>>>>
|
| Hi Dan,
|
| It's my main email account (been working al day!)... replace "<at>" with @
| ... texas@vfemail.*net as you have yours listed for spam evasion.

I understand the format; the address didn't work. More specifically the
mail server for vfemail.net said that there was no user texas. Send me
some email directly.

| I've done
| a bit more research and found that to get an Aironet AP4800 to load Cisco
| 340 8.xx fw, I must upgrade incrementally from 3.xx...

This still doesn't make sense on several levels. 8.x is a recent version
for the 340 bridge series and the original 4800 access point, but not for
the 340 access point series. There have been a few obscure cases that
(sort of) require incremental upgrade, but nothing like what you are
saying. What exactly do you have and what firmware is it running?

| been told this is true
| for any fw below 7.xx. Question: will flashing up to 8.xx fix the bandwidth
| limitation when using WEP encryption?

No. If you have an original (non A series) LM4800 radio card you must replace
it with a 4800A or better to run WEP at > 2 Mb/s.

Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com

Dan Lanciani schrieb:

> When you called to ask why your nearly-new AP4800E couldn't do WEP at 11 Mb/s
> they told you that it was a hardware problem with the chassis and that you
> needed to "upgrade" (where "upgrade" meant to toss the AP4800E and buy new)
> to an AP4800B series with its low-power 35mW radio and all sorts of silly
> license key management. All you really needed to do was replace the radio
> card with an LM4800A (a 100mW card with an A503 cpu just like the B series)...
> if you could find one. In fact, Aironet (and then Cisco) shipped AP4800Es
> (and BR342s which are the identical hardware) with LM4800As for years to
> support customers who demanded 100mW solutions. Cisco even shipped LM4800As
> by themselves after the 350 series was introduced; I'm not sure why.

Drop in a LMC352, in Europe limited to 50mW, but much better sensitivity
than the LMC4800 or LMC34x.
I only kept one LMC4800 for the collection's completeness.

> | It lacks the ability of a short
> | preamble.
> That is unfortunately true of even the LM4800A. Of course, there are some
> advantages to long preambles (diversity selection).

On my 342 AP diversity works (with both a LMC342 or a LMC352 radio)
together with short preamble.

I once got a bunch of 3500E AP from a migration project, and "converted"
them with LMC352 radios and FW 8.80

--
Uli

These opinions are mine. All found typos are yours.