[XSCE] Re: [support-gang] [UKids] "XO-1 classrooms" don't reliably connect to many/most Wifi AP's

[T Gillett]

I have to disagree.

I do not believe that any conventional router will work properly with XO-1s
while the current mesh functionality is enabled in the XO-1 if the AP is
subject to rigorous testing.

It is clearly evident from our tests that even if only one XO-1 has the
current mesh facility enabled, it will disrupt the operation of every other
XO-1 in the vicinity which is trying to connect to any AP. The disruption
is readily seen with James's beacon time monitoring script.

By comparison, later model XOs operating concurrently in the same
environment are not disrupted at all by the presence of the XO-1 running
mesh.

The unwanted interaction is between XO-1s, not with the AP or with other XO
types.

I believe the solution has to be found in the XO-1.

The initial, brute force, solution is to switch off the mesh capability
completely, which results in reliable operation of the XOs in connecting to
the AP.






On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:52 AM, Tim Moody <tim at timmoody.com> wrote:

> I completely agree that we have evidence that some routers (and android
> hotspots) just work and that if you can figure out how to make this
> reliable and even how to add this capability to other routers that
> currently fail that would be the best solution.
>
> However, as a parallel track we should try to get a practical solution in
> the near term that may involve disabling mesh.
>
> Tim
>
> -----Original Message----- From: James Cameron
> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2014 4:51 PM
> To: T Gillett
> Cc: xsce-devel ; Unleash Kids! ; Devel's in the Details ; server-devel ;
> Bernie Innocenti ; Community Support Volunteers -- who help respond to help
> ATlaptop.org
> Subject: Re: [support-gang] [UKids] "XO-1 classrooms" don't reliably
> connect to many/most Wifi AP's
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 08, 2014 at 09:20:05PM +1000, T Gillett wrote:
>
>> I guess the key point is that we have to make changes to the XO-1
>> rather than the routers :-]
>>
>
> I don't know that yet, sorry.
>
> While the evidence so far does not incriminate the routers, there are
> some routers that have worked fine, and the reason they work fine is
> not obvious ... so I can't dismiss the possibility that a router might
> be modified.
>
> --
> James Cameron
> http://quozl.linux.org.au/
> _______________________________________________
> support-gang mailing list
> support-gang at lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/support-gang
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20140210/a710ae31/attachment.html>