Skip Gundlach wrote:

I configure the bridge to a blank SSID, which makes it look for the
strongest signal. That's ok, but in this case, that caused it to
redirect to their signin page. Otherwise, were that not the case, I
could then go into the configuration page and specify which of the
available ones, even those not shown, perhaps from a hidden SSID, or
one I know to be available at less strength than the first (and limited
to) 8 shown, such as I did before the pay site hijacked the signal.



If your browser home page requires *any* DNS access to get to it, you
will get redirected to the signin page on most commercial wireless ISPs.
Similarly, if the router has got the DNS server address from the ISP
via DHCP, and your bridge has a 'friendly' name for its configuration
page rather than a dotted IP address, you will end up at the signin page
again :-(

Set your home page to blank then try accessing the bridge by its ip
address rather than by name. The url should be of the form
http://nnn.nnn.nnn.nnn/ fill in the correct numbers for your setup.

If that works for you, BOOKMARK the location in that format or maybe set
it as your home page.



--
Ian Malcolm. London, ENGLAND. (NEWSGROUP REPLY PREFERRED)
ianm[at]the[dash]malcolms[dot]freeserve[dot]co[dot]uk
[at]=@, [dash]=- & [dot]=. *Warning* HTML & 32K emails -- NUL:
'Stingo' Albacore #1554 - 15' Early 60's, Uffa Fox designed,
All varnished hot moulded wooden racing dinghy.

Hi, Ian, and group(s),

Ian Malcolm wrote:
Skip Gundlach wrote:

I configure the bridge to a blank SSID, which makes it look for the
strongest signal. That's ok, but in this case, that caused it to
redirect to their signin page. Otherwise, were that not the case, I
could then go into the configuration page and specify which of the
available ones, even those not shown, perhaps from a hidden SSID, or
one I know to be available at less strength than the first (and limited
to) 8 shown, such as I did before the pay site hijacked the signal.



If your browser home page requires *any* DNS access to get to it, you
will get redirected to the signin page on most commercial wireless ISPs.
Similarly, if the router has got the DNS server address from the ISP
via DHCP, and your bridge has a 'friendly' name for its configuration
page rather than a dotted IP address, you will end up at the signin page
again :-(

Set your home page to blank then try accessing the bridge by its ip
address rather than by name. The url should be of the form
http://nnn.nnn.nnn.nnn/ fill in the correct numbers for your setup.

If that works for you, BOOKMARK the location in that format or maybe set
it as your home page.


Would that it did - My reaction comes from merely typing in the URL
(the way I usually reach the bridge to configure it) in nnn.nnn.nnn.nnn
format, whereupon the pay site(s? - I've not been in an area with more
than one at the moment, though the readout shows many presumed pay
sites as well, some of which have more strength, but not as good a
communications level)) redirects to their signin page.

The bridge has no name - there's not a place to name it, even. In AP
format, I could name the AP if I wanted, as well as the SSID. However,
the bridge is notable only from its MAC address. Setting my home page
to a blank (no characters on the line) has no effect - and in any case,
unless I were to click the home icon, other than at startup, the home
page would not appear.

So, I'm looking into (don't really know where to look - one of the
cites in this thread looks promising but I have to say that I'm so gun
shy about Senao that I'd want to see one working before I went through
anything remotely like what I have with wlansolutions) some other
bridge which would see all available without selecting one for me, and
let me push a radio button rather than have to type in the actual name.
In this area, at least, while not so in my particular location at the
moment, there are many instances of duplicate SSID names.

The one I have (from the wlansolutions website "Multi-Client
Bridge/Access Point Module Prism 2.5 High Power (200mW) 2611 CB3 PLUS
MD" - the module, not enclosed version - 200, not 250mw, though Ric has
the same product name unit - perhaps in the desktop version - on his
boat) requires typing in the SSID - which, if there are more than one
of the same name, makes for pot luck in selection. If, as should be
possible, the scan shows two of the same name, a given MAC should show,
and if that one is selected, that should be the one for the bridge to
associate.

So, perhaps better covered in a different thread, are there any other
suggestions for client bridge replacement candidates - ones which would
allow me to click my bookmark/favorite/whatever to reach the
configuration page, and point and click on the desired connection point
- but also *not* connect to any until asked, regardless of strength??

BTW, at least at the moment, the link Ansley provided stalls and goes
nowhere when attempting any info other than the home page...

--
Ian Malcolm. London, ENGLAND. (NEWSGROUP REPLY PREFERRED)

Thanks for all the dialogue. I'm passing it along to various other
non-subscribers to see if there's a solution visible.

L8R

Skip

Morgan 461 #2
SV Flying Pig KI4MPC
See our galleries at www.justpickone.org/skip/gallery!
Follow us at http://groups.google.com/group/flyingpiglog and/or
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheFlyingPigLog

"Believe me, my young friend, there is *nothing*-absolutely
nothing-half so much worth doing as simply messing,
messing-about-in-boats; messing about in boats-or *with* boats.

In or out of 'em, it doesn't matter. Nothing seems really to matter,
that's the charm of it.

Whether you get away, or whether you don't; whether you arrive at your
destination or whether you reach somewhere else, or whether you never
get anywhere at all, you're always busy, and you never do anything in
particular; and when you've done it there's always something else to
do, and you can do it if you like, but you'd much better not."

Skip - Working on the boat wrote:
Hi, Ian, and group(s),

Ian Malcolm wrote:

Skip Gundlach wrote:


I configure the bridge to a blank SSID, which makes it look for the
strongest signal. That's ok, but in this case, that caused it to
redirect to their signin page. Otherwise, were that not the case, I
could then go into the configuration page and specify which of the
available ones, even those not shown, perhaps from a hidden SSID, or
one I know to be available at less strength than the first (and limited
to) 8 shown, such as I did before the pay site hijacked the signal.



If your browser home page requires *any* DNS access to get to it, you
will get redirected to the signin page on most commercial wireless ISPs.
Similarly, if the router has got the DNS server address from the ISP
via DHCP, and your bridge has a 'friendly' name for its configuration
page rather than a dotted IP address, you will end up at the signin page
again :-(

Set your home page to blank then try accessing the bridge by its ip
address rather than by name. The url should be of the form
http://nnn.nnn.nnn.nnn/ fill in the correct numbers for your setup.


Would that it did - My reaction comes from merely typing in the URL
(the way I usually reach the bridge to configure it) in nnn.nnn.nnn.nnn
format, whereupon the pay site(s? - I've not been in an area with more
than one at the moment, though the readout shows many presumed pay
sites as well, some of which have more strength, but not as good a
communications level)) redirects to their signin page.



If no DNS lookup is being done, there should be absolutely NO
oppertunity for a redirect. Its possible that the router you have put
in between your LAN and the bridge is causing this behaviour. You
*might* need to set up a static route.

Another possibility is you have one of the many varieties of 'search
assistant' or internet 'booster' malware on your PC that is trying to
reach its homepage and is therefore triggering the wireless ISP login
redirect. A full scan with a number of different spyware and virus
scanners is probably a good idea at this point.

Do you ever get this redirection when trying to access the Router config
page?

If you are goint to take this to a new thread I suggest dropping r.b.b
and *possibly* r.b.c due to the extremely technical content and tenuous
connection with boating.

You may also want to ask about this issue on the LOCAL newsgroups (they
are NOT part of USENET) at GRC. N.B. web access is currently read only
so to ask a question there, you will need to configure a newsreader.
You probably want the group grc.techtalk. Start by reading
http://www.grc.com/discussions.htm . . .

--
Ian Malcolm. London, ENGLAND. (NEWSGROUP REPLY PREFERRED)
ianm[at]the[dash]malcolms[dot]freeserve[dot]co[dot]uk
[at]=@, [dash]=- & [dot]=. *Warning* HTML & 32K emails -- NUL:
'Stingo' Albacore #1554 - 15' Early 60's, Uffa Fox designed,
All varnished hot moulded wooden racing dinghy.

On Tue, 26 Dec 2006 18:17:24 +0000, Ian Malcolm
wrote:

If you are goint to take this to a new thread I suggest dropping r.b.b
and *possibly* r.b.c due to the extremely technical content and tenuous
connection with boating.

I disagree with that advice.

There are *many* of us doing serious cruising and looking for ways to
enhance our internet WiFi connectivity. Skip is well into the
advanced course with what he is trying to do, and I for one follow his
networking adventures with great interest.

I think your recommendation to try and connect without the Vonage
router is a good suggestion towards isolating the problem.

Hi, Ian, and group(s),

Would that it did - My reaction comes from merely typing in the URL
(the way I usually reach the bridge to configure it) in nnn.nnn.nnn.nnn
format, whereupon the pay site(s? - I've not been in an area with more
than one at the moment, though the readout shows many presumed pay
sites as well, some of which have more strength, but not as good a
communications level)) redirects to their signin page.



If no DNS lookup is being done, there should be absolutely NO
oppertunity for a redirect. Its possible that the router you have put
in between your LAN and the bridge is causing this behaviour. You
*might* need to set up a static route.

The Bridge has a static IP (which I set to be outside the usual use
range so as to avoid IP conflicts) - and the Vonage unit IP can't be
changed - but, like the Bridge, the DLink can be set to whatever I
want, also static. I have used it in DHCP, though, so it will get me
on the air - and that on-the-air signal is what Vonage uses to find the
MAC address to connect me to the phone grid...


Another possibility is you have one of the many varieties of 'search
assistant' or internet 'booster' malware on your PC that is trying to
reach its homepage and is therefore triggering the wireless ISP login
redirect. A full scan with a number of different spyware and virus
scanners is probably a good idea at this point.

That's possible, but highly unlikely, as I have more than one current,
up to date, tool which checks weekly, and also notifies me of any
attempt to intrude (very few) or insert malware (even fewer). Full
virus and malware scans are done weekly. Oversight (active scanning)
is on full time.


Do you ever get this redirection when trying to access the Router config
page?

No. My router is easily accessible through my AP, which is set to the
198.162.(whatever the router uses).xxx class

Further, we are now at the point where only a direct connection (NIC)
will allow any communication with the top of the mast or beyond.

We briefly had connectivity to the Vonage router by going to a DLink
DI-614 (ancient tech, left over from my landside home) router WAN port
with the bridge, and putting the Vonage unit on one of the LAN ports.
I connected to the DLink over wifi and was able to interrogate it and
the Vonage unit.

For whatever reasons, those abilities (vonage and bridge - I can still
look at and configure the DLink) have gone away. Worse, and supportive
of the thought that either the Senao is simply junk, or perhaps, also,
just unsuited to the purpose, direct (over either configured NIC for
setting up the bridge, or DHCP NIC for access to the internet)
connection is currently the only way I can communicate.

That's not acceptable to me, but it does, at least, after lots of
fiddling, as the Senao unit is becoming slow to respond in the main
Beacon page (there are more than one; I can connect to lesser strength
ones and get a login page more readily than the close, very high [100%
link, 89% signal] one which got me started down this road) I've been
using, allow me to be on the air, as it's how I'm posting this...

Thus, as mentioned elsewhere, I'm ready to replace it; finding a
lightly amplified client bridge's - with my specification about how one
connects - challenges have been described in other responses.

About to take all the yard folks out for a sail today in reward for all
the assistance they've rendered in the past; 85, mostly sunny, 2-3
chop, 10-15S should make for a glorious trip to nowhere (we're coming
back!) :{))

L8R

Skip

Morgan 461 #2
SV Flying Pig KI4MPC
See our galleries at www.justpickone.org/skip/gallery!
Follow us at http://groups.google.com/group/flyingpiglog and/or
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheFlyingPigLog

"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you
didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail
away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails.
Explore.
Dream. Discover." - Mark Twain

So, perhaps better covered in a different thread, are there any other
suggestions for client bridge replacement candidates - ones which would
allow me to click my bookmark/favorite/whatever to reach the
configuration page, and point and click on the desired connection point
- but also *not* connect to any until asked, regardless of strength??

You've been told this info before, several times. You're trying to use gear
that plainly does not do what you want. Stop trying. Use gear that's known
to do what you're after.

It's trivial, get a pair of WRT54G routers, use one as a link to the shore.
Use the other as a on-boat access point, wired to the first one. Done.
Then it's just a trivial matter to browse to the shore linking device,
picking the on-shore SSID desired and you're done.

On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 12:46:55 -0500, "Bill Kearney"
wkearney-99@hot-mail-com wrote:

It's trivial, get a pair of WRT54G routers, use one as a link to the shore.
Use the other as a on-boat access point, wired to the first one. Done.
Then it's just a trivial matter to browse to the shore linking device,
picking the on-shore SSID desired and you're done.

I'm sure that the WRT54Gs work fine in your configuration,

but:

- I don't believe they are weather proof.

- I'm pretty sure they are not high power ( 50 mw )

- Do no directly support Power Over Ethernet (POE)

So although they can potentially do the job, they are not exactly
ideal for mounting up the mast in an extended range application.

Wayne,

Have you looked at the Inscape Data Corp CB54E?

I am considering it for the top of my mast.

Tell me what you think.

Ansley Sawyer
SV Pacem

On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 07:54:26 -0500, "Ansley W. Sawyer"
wrote:

Have you looked at the Inscape Data Corp CB54E?

I am considering it for the top of my mast.

I looked at the specs and it seems interesting but I have not yet
tried one or heard of any first hand reports.

The key with all of these ethernet units is the quality of the
internal firmware which performs the network scan function and allows
you to select/configure an access point. It is especially important
that you can select by MAC address in addition to SSID because there
are a lot of duplicate SSIDs in some harbors.

- I don't believe they are weather proof.

Weatherproof and not working is not a solution. There are any number of
ways to put something into a box. But to that end, I put my WRT54G in the
radar arch last spring. As of winter it's shown no signs whatsoever of
corrosion.

- I'm pretty sure they are not high power ( 50 mw )

You are incorrect. It's adjustable. But high-power does not mean better
functionality. This is a very common misconception.

- Do no directly support Power Over Ethernet (POE)

Again, if it doesn't work, what's the point. POE isn't all it's cracked up
to be if you're not using effective gauge wire. Wire that's too thin will
cause voltage drop.

So although they can potentially do the job, they are not exactly
ideal for mounting up the mast in an extended range application.

If you want it to work then building a box or running wire is a trivial fix.