StarV3 v1.2.2b build 2327 is ready for testing

[tony]

The BETA has been released, and is available on http://files.star-os.com/

While the change log is not complete at the moment, there are some changes listed on this thread http://forums.star-os.com/showthread.php?t=6714.

Changes since v1.2.1b build 2321
*) Transmit power clamping is now in place, so setting a higher than supported transmit power will work once again.
*) DHCP client will no longer restart RIP or OSPF if the bound IP has not changed. (only effects lease renewal when the Atheros client [re]associates)

Please do not upgrade your system unless you have access to it via the ethernet, in case you need to downgrade.

There are a few known incompatibilities and/or problems with this releases:
*) TurboG is now dynamic, and not static as in v1.1.x.
*) The rate shown under "rx rate" in the AP's association display may be inaccurate if using 802.11G, with rates under 12M. (cosmetic only)
*) When an Atheros client [re]associates, the system may lose it's routing information. This is not a problem if the client card uses DHCP client, or using a routing protocol.

Please post your results as there are bound to be a few issues left to iron out before we remove the BETA status.

Some operational differences include (mainly related to regulatory requirements):
*) Atheros channel and country code list no longer contains an 'All Channel' setting (## and #!).
*) U1 country code (US + FCC3) no longer contains the FCC3 channels, however country UZ can be used in it's place for systems that require them.

For best operation, please ensure your client and AP use the same country code.

For those wanting to try the live upgrade feature via starutil, simply add the -a (apply) flag to the command line when uploading the firmware.
This requires that your system is using build 2321 or newer, and starutil 1.16.

[tony]

Areas of focus while testing this release include:
All things Atheros
PPPoE
Bridging
WDS
OLSR
OSPF

Feel free to post your results, even if you do not find any issues with the release.

[tog]

Are there any cloaking transmit rate incompatibilities between this build and the 1.1.x series?

Is WMM/WME QoS enabled?

Is there any change perceptible to the user (us) in the way bridging works? (WDS at AP no longer requires bridge interface maybe?)

[tony]

"Are there any cloaking transmit rate incompatibilities between this build and the 1.1.x series?"

Cloaking should be fully rate compatible with our 1.1.x releases.

"Is WMM/WME QoS enabled?"

Yes, it is supported and enabled by default. (part of the SuperA/G option)

"Is there any change perceptible to the user (us) in the way bridging works? (WDS at AP no longer requires bridge interface maybe?)"

Yes, the AP no longer needs to be part of a bridge group in order to accept WDS clients.

[soulmata]

I get the same problem with this beta release as I did with 1.2.1 and 1.2.0b

TurboG apparently does not function "at all" with this release. Here is the scenario:

Remote end, our DC, a WAR4 unit running 1.1.13, PTP link in TurboG mode

Local end, our office, a WAR4 unit running 1.1.13, again a PTP link in TurboG mode

Signal level is steady at -47, quality is consistently high at 95-100%

If I upgrade one end to the beta series, the link completely does not work. Signal remains at "-95" and it cycles through channels. It never associates. WEP is used, and I checked to make sure it was enabled still and the key was correct. No amount of adjusting the link would bring it back up except for going back to 1.1.13. The instant it reboots with 1.1.13, the link comes back up at -47 and works fine.


Edit: And now I see you mention that TurboG is incompatible between release and beta. Whoops!

[tony]

802.11g turbo is a funny beast, as it has moved from a static (always-on) turbo, to a dynamic turbo technique.

To use 802.11g turbo, you will need to update both ends of the p2p link. Turbo will enable and disable itself based on traffic load, and signal levels.

[mimbach]

I hope this helps...
From our datacenter the last hop from the tower to my house is as follows.
My house is setup as an ap and the tower is pointed to me has a client.
When I make a change to my ap and the client has to reconnect it loses its routing for the routes it pushes to my house. I was sshing from my radio to the ip on the radio interface on the client radio on the tower and rebooting it. Now I just setup ping watchdog to ping an ip it routes to me. So when I make a change like clock work it comes back up on the rf side, but no routing. So the ping watchdog reboots the client on the tower and then it all works.

[tog]

1) Are you using 1.2.2b/2327 on both sides and still having this problem?

2) When this happens, are you able to ping from one system to the IP on the other system's wpci1?

If the problem is as you say, a loss of routing, you should still be able to ping the IP on the other radio because there is no routing involved in doing that. It is like 192.168.0.1 pinging 192.168.0.2 both connected via a switch or directly via a crossover cable. No routes needed to do that.

[mimbach]

to Togs questions...

1. YES

2. YES

[tony]

mimbach,

Thank you for your problem report. I have been able to duplicate it, and will get it fixed in the upcoming release.

[bobbyc]

Guys,
I know your stance on Prism 2.5 vs Atheros, but I have to ask: Is prism 2.5 support going to continue? CPU utilization and general performance sucks with the new driver (hostAP?), as compared to your V2 driver which has been flawless for us.
Bob C

[lonnie]

Prism is dead and not to be found in the new beta. We are strictly Atheros in support.

Continue with v2 for prism support.

To be successful in 2.4 Ghz you need cloaking and that means Atheros.

[bobbyc]

No argument here.
Thanks,
Bob C

[David L. Vrablic]

Prism is dead and not to be found in the new beta. We are strictly Atheros in support.

Continue with v2 for prism support.

To be successful in 2.4 Ghz you need cloaking and that means Atheros.

I hear what you are saying and for fixed clients that is the way to go.
BUT
I have a very heavy demand for Corp laptops andgeneral public access, in building access, marinas and campgrounds.

I don't need Prism but cloaking is just not important in the tourist markets with the overall demand around here.

I can't mix cloaking and general access Hot Spot modes on the same AP.

[lonnie]

David, you can cloak your backhaul to save some spectrum, though.

[greg]

I installed this on a war2 board with a 5.x backbone link last night. It has been bouncing up and down much of the night. No probs like this prior to the upgrade. I logged in and the log shows eth going up and down. I'm not even sure what if anything is attached to the ethernet there. Signal is 68-71 and rate is locked at 12 using a cm9. It is not rebooting and log shows nothing regarding the radios losing association. I changed the channel from the AP. It reassociated but I couldn't ping it from home. AP showed no IP for it. I could ping it from the AP so I ssh'd into it and rebooted. It came back up and all is well again for now.

[rbolduc]

Is there any problems with cloaking? I again tried this on my home wrap CPE and with the latest beta the signal is the same as the latest release but my quality is all over the place.. I have reverted back to 1.1.13-2080 and I am running back at 95-100 quality

Reed

[tony]

There is no known issues with Cloaking. If you can provide a Little more information about your setup, that would be great.

[rbolduc]

The CPE is a Wrap with 2 WLM54G cards 18volt PS, 30' Cat5 Running G-Mode Only, lock rate at 12mb, x2 cloaking, Short Preamble, Super G Features

AP War 4 1.1.13-2080 WLM54G, Same settings as above 24volt PS..

With the latest beta the signals are about the same which was fixed from beta 2321, but my quality jumps all over from 0-100 and any surfing comes to a halt, pings go up to +600 ms, I revert back to 1.1.13-2080 change no settings and I am off and running, pings +2ms.. I have tried to disable Super AG at the cpe with no change, I have increased both distance settings to 10 Miles (Was 4.25) actual is 2.25..


Thanks
Reed

[tony]

What are your signal levels? Also, with the new release, the Auto rate should work much better than in the previous releases.

Let us know what happens if you change your rate.

[tony]

The 'route loss after client associates' issue was resolved in the upcoming release, as were many other little things that may help.

Pending any complications with last minute testing, we'll release an updated version this morning yet.

I installed this on a war2 board with a 5.x backbone link last night. It has been bouncing up and down much of the night. No probs like this prior to the upgrade. I logged in and the log shows eth going up and down. I'm not even sure what if anything is attached to the ethernet there. Signal is 68-71 and rate is locked at 12 using a cm9. It is not rebooting and log shows nothing regarding the radios losing association. I changed the channel from the AP. It reassociated but I couldn't ping it from home. AP showed no IP for it. I could ping it from the AP so I ssh'd into it and rebooted. It came back up and all is well again for now.

[rbolduc]

What are your signal levels? Also, with the new release, the Auto rate should work much better than in the previous releases.

Let us know what happens if you change your rate.

Signals are -75 at the AP and -77 at the CPE, I will set both to auto try again and post any findings....

[lonnie]

Make sure that Client and AP use the same country code.

[i20access]

The 'route loss after client associates' issue was resolved in the upcoming release, as were many other little things that may help.

This is the only thing stopping me from trying this on a main backhaul link, or rolling it out fully on 30+ towers. Is the tx power issue fixed as well or did 1.2.2b fix that? Is the rx rate cosmetic display fixed? Care to comment on the "many other little things" or any other caveats that may be in this version to stop me from rolling it out everywhere?

Pending any complications with last minute testing, we'll release an updated version this morning yet.

Sounds great!! How's this coming along? :)

EDIT: I see it released in the files section, thanks Tony!

EDIT2: I never downloaded the MIBs, can these be restored?


Thanks VNC,

[tony]

There is a new release thread that states all that has changed. (including the fixes that you mention, minus the cosmetic one).

The mibs are available in each platform firmware archive now.

[i20access]

There is a new release thread that states all that has changed. (including the fixes that you mention, minus the cosmetic one).

The mibs are available in each platform firmware archive now.

Thanks again Tony.

[rbolduc]

Make sure that Client and AP use the same country code.


Yes both are set for US, I have upgraded the AP to the same beta and its a little better and the signal picked up 2 db or so but a throughput test will go from 1020k to 13k.. I have tried G mode only B/G mode and no cloaking with no success. I am now going to try the Wrap CPE at 1.1.3-2080 and the war AP at the latest beta and report back.

Reed

[rbolduc]

OK AP is running 1.2.3b-2333 and Wrap is running 1.1.3-2080 and that combo works awesome! but if I load the beta in the Wrap it coughs and sputters at best.... Could it be something to do with the just the wrap image?

Reed

[tony]

All the images are the same, however there could be something WRAP specific. Can you turn your WRAP into the AP for a moment, and see if you have issues?

[rbolduc]

All the images are the same, however there could be something WRAP specific. Can you turn your WRAP into the AP for a moment, and see if you have issues?

Ok I flipped flopped them with a little change but not much, I have PM'd you the info for that tower if you would like to look around..

Thanks
Reed

[ninedd]

*) Atheros channel and country code list no longer contains an 'All Channel' setting (## and #!).Hi. We had all been told earlier that this would not be the case. I understand the desire to be compliant, but MT and Canopy and Orthagon and Tranzeo and everyone else offers some manner of off-channel settings for testing or for Amature Radio guys or whatever. I know it's a sensitive subject, but Morotola is the largest supplier of certified systems out there, and they offer 'test' modes. With other software vendors, its as simply as this...

interface wireless info> print
supported-bands=2ghz-b,5ghz,5ghz-turbo,2ghz-g
2ghz-b channels=2312,2317,2322,2327,2332,2337,2342,2347,2 352,2357,2362,2367, 2372,2412,2417,2422,2427,2432,2437,2442,2447,2452, 2457,2462, 2467,2472,2512,2532,2552,2572,2592,2612,2632,2652, 2672,2692, 2712,2732,2484It seems that everyone (officially or unoffically) allows some way, or at least some backdoor method, of unlocking all channels that the card is capable of.

[lonnie]

We cannot speak for others. Our decision is to become compliant. One day you will regret using channels you are not allowed to use. Imagine if your system caused a plane crash. How would you feel then? Would you have anything left after all the civil suits?

[palmczak]

One day you will regret using channels you are not allowed to use. Imagine if your system caused a plane crash. How would you feel then? Would you have anything left after all the civil suits?

This is a weak argument. Since most if not all WISP's have voilated some regulation at one time or another. Those that voilate the regulations will continue to no matter what FREQ/channels are availalble in SOS. I know the ones I compete with run WAY over power, and I suspect operate in out of bounds channels as well.

It is not something we use to provide regular service but it is a tool that has been used in the past. We work hard to be compliant. With the cut throat RF tactics of other WISP's (actually any RF users, we have major trouble with the electric utility the gear they use takes everything down even Canopy) and equipment manufacturers it seems that our hands are being tied.

I can sleep better knowing I can voilate the regulations less now.

[tony]

We will not discuss this matter, nor turn it into a debate. The decision has been made on many merits, including the ability to become certified in the future.

While we don't want to provide any issues for those upgrading, we do need to be "certification friendly".

Right now we are still in development, however by the 1.3.0 release we will have an FCC release, and World release of the software that may be a little more lax in regards to regulations. Both the world and FCC versions of the software will be interchangeable.

[Stratolinks]

The primary concern I currently have with this is the use of channel 0, 12 and 13 while using cloaking. With cloaking these stay within the alloted spectrum (at least for Canada) and are therefore legal to use. Does this mean that these channels will no longer be usable?

The only other concern I have is the ability to select channels well out of the normal band (5.9-6.1GHz) that I have paid a license for the use of (I have been discussing this with an Industry Canada Rep), but I assume there will always be some means of doing this right?

[lonnie]

Licensed users will be able to use their desired channels. Very few of those guys exist and the "noise" being generated is mostly by people who expect they can do what they want.

Regulations are getting tighter all the time and we are simply doing what we have to do. The wild and wooly days are nearly gone.

[soulmata]

The penalties for transmitting on a frequency you don't have authority to transmit on are pretty serious in the U.S. You may get away with it for months or even years, but why even bother taking the risk?

It's not like you can say "Oops, my bad." and think the FCC is going to forget your transgressions.

[Stratolinks]

Licensed users will be able to use their desired channels. Very few of those guys exist and the "noise" being generated is mostly by people who expect they can do what they want.

Regulations are getting tighter all the time and we are simply doing what we have to do. The wild and wooly days are nearly gone.

Yes, and they are starting to crack down on some that are using too much power. There is one near one of my sites that I had the opportunity to discuss with one of their ex-employees. Their idea of an access point is a Orinico hooked up to a 2Watt amp that is attached to a 15dB omni. (Let's just say they are a wee bit over the 36dBm ERP limit and just blasting out noise). Then they put customers on 15 miles away with little 15dB panel antennas and CB3s. He just got fed up with it and left. After nearly 3 years it is still blasting out the same noise (it is on Ch2, I am using Ch11 and the noise floor is at -81).

There have been several public reports of WISPs in the US being charged by the FCC. One I recall reading about recently was charged over $250,000 for operating their outdoor links at high power levels in the 5.1GHz range.

[palmczak]

I can respect the position that StarOS is taking. I will consider the options that every system offers very closely.

We colocate on a busy site. There are atleast 5 other RF operators and 2 cellular carriers. There have been no less than 10 complaints to the FCC regarding the interference being generated by the equipment being used by the electric utilitiy RF gear. Officially it operates in 900MHZ band. But interferes with 152.7mhz (and 2 other UHF licenced freqs) as well as all of the 2.4 band and forget about 900MHZ. Every operator including 1 of the cellular carriers has made formal complaints. Not one of us has ever even gotten a phone call. just a standard form letter stating that if there was a legal violation we needed to take it up with our local law enforcement. That is a laugh. Again I do not do this intentionally however when the utility feels the need to change freqs and 350 subs are down because nothing runs clean. We have done things that I am not prud of but it is only because of the voilations of others.

We are changing the gear at this location to Canopy since it is the only gear that has a prayer.

NOTE.. We have ONE location that has this extreme situation. But everywhere is seeing huge increases in RF energy and I beleive this will be the more and more common as time moves on.