Tangent Quattro

[Scott]

Does anyone have experience with this Internet radio? I am finding
nearly every time I try to use it I need to reboot it by unplugging
the power supply. I have changed the mode to static IP, given it an
IP address slightly different to my computer, checked the DNS server
details with the ISP, entered two DNS server addresses and updated the
firmware.

Any ideas what is going wrong? Is static IP preferable?

[J G Miller]

On Saturday, February 4th, 2012, 10:08:48h +0000, Scott asked:

> Any ideas what is going wrong?

No idea because you have not described the problem.

Saying "need to reboot" only indicates what you do to solve the problem.

> Is static IP preferable?

Of course it is preferable. A static IP means that the box does
not have to talk to a DHCP on the LAN (which may or may not
be running) in order to get its IP address before it can
do anything else.

[Scott]

On Sat, 4 Feb 2012 15:24:50 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>
wrote:

>On Saturday, February 4th, 2012, 10:08:48h +0000, Scott asked:
>
>> Any ideas what is going wrong?
>
>No idea because you have not described the problem.

Ok. Reasonable observation. The problem is failure to connect to the
station (it just says 'Connecting') or indeed to anything else. If
you try to download Stations or My Stations nothing happens. I can't
recreate it at the moment as it is working okay. The problem seems to
occur after longer periods out of use. I will make detailed notes
next time it happens.

>
>Saying "need to reboot" only indicates what you do to solve the problem.
>
>> Is static IP preferable?
>
>Of course it is preferable. A static IP means that the box does
>not have to talk to a DHCP on the LAN (which may or may not
>be running) in order to get its IP address before it can
>do anything else.

Thanks. That's reassuring that at least in that respect I am thinking
along the right lines.

[J G Miller]

On Saturday, February 4th, 2012, at 15:43:06h +0000, Scott wrote:

> The problem is failure to connect to the station
> (it just says 'Connecting') or indeed to anything else.

Okay, that is a good description of the symptom.

The cause (failure to connect) can be due to a number of different issues

> If you try to download Stations or My Stations nothing happens.

This information is even more helpful in diagnosing the problem.

Maybe it would be helpful to go through the sequence of what
happens when you switch on and try to connect to a station
and then you can understand better where the problems are coming from?

1) Power on radio and it boots the operating system.
(IF you run a upnp diagnostic program on your PC
you can even learn which operating system it runs.)

2) The radio assigns its IP address to its ethernet interface.
If using dhcp, the radio has to send a broadcast to the LAN
and wait for a reply back from the DHCP server with its
assigned by the DHCP server IP address.

3) The radio will then talk to its Radio Database server which
is hardwired into the radio's firmware

4) It will then download some initial information and may even
set the time on the radio if an NTP server has been assigned

5) When you then go into the radio menu and say go into the favorites
menu, the radio will query the Radio Database server and download
your favorites list (XML format for the data as far as
I am aware).
Similarly if you go to Location or Genre, the radio contacts
the Radio Database server and gets the listing at that level
of the menu.

6) When you select a radio station either from Genre, Location,
or Favorites, the radio contacts the Radio Database server using
the URL on the Radio Database Server for that station. The
Radio Database Server then sends the real radio stream URL for
that station back to the radio and the radio redirects to the
actual radio station stream.

Now if the failure is occuring at the cannot get to Favorites,
Genre, Location level, this shows that the radio is not able to
get information from the Radio Database server which can be
a number of issues.

1) is your router actually connected to the Internet

2) the radio will probably use a name not a raw IP number (which
would be rather stupid actually) for the Radio Database Server
so it needs to contact a DNS server to convert the name to
an IP address

3) is your request to the Radio Database server getting through
or timing out because your Internet connections is overloaded
with other traffic (both upload and downloads)

4) is the Radio Database server up or is it overloaded by other
users

Number 1 is probably the least likely, 4 next so, and 3 possible
but unlikely. So is your radio pointed to a reliable DNS server.
Ideally you should be running your own DNS server on your home
LAN instead of relying on the ISP DNS servers, some of whom are
notoriously bad.

If you want to try a test, when your radio is having trouble
downloading Favorites, Genre, Location menu listing, go to
your PC and try connecting to the website of your Radio
Database server. (This is assuming your PC is pointed to
the same DNS server as the radio.) If connection to that
is poor or sluggish it ties in with the behavior of the radio.
Ideally, before trying to use the web browser, you should
run a DNS query on the name of the Radio Database server
from the command line and see if it is slow or times out
getting that information.

This of course has all assumed that you have an ethernet
or rock solid WiFi connection from your radio to the
router. If the WiFi connection from your radio to your
router is flaky, then this will indeed result in sluggish
to failure behavior in trying to get Favorite, Genre, Location
menu information, let alone reliably playing the radio stream.

WiFi stability can even be impaired by neighbors firing up
their routers and initially trying to use the same channels
that you are currently using.

So hope this helps to provide a picture as to the rather
complex steps involved, and why a single simple answer to
the problem cannot be provided.

[Richard Evans]

On 04/02/2012 15:24, J G Miller wrote:

>> Is static IP preferable?
>
> Of course it is preferable. A static IP means that the box does
> not have to talk to a DHCP on the LAN (which may or may not
> be running) in order to get its IP address before it can
> do anything else.

I agree that a static address is preferable, although I find devices
using DHCP only take a few moments to get an address.

One problem I do sometimes get with DHCP, is if I need to reset my
router for some reason. This makes it forget it's IP address tables, so
then when I reboot something, it can get assigned an address that is
already in use, and I start getting conflicts. Then I end up having to
reset everything that is using DHCP, to get rid of the conflicts.

Not sure whether Scott's problem might be something similar to this.

Richard E.

[hwh]

On 2/5/12 9:47 AM, Richard Evans wrote:
> On 04/02/2012 15:24, J G Miller wrote:
>
>>> Is static IP preferable?
>>
>> Of course it is preferable. A static IP means that the box does
>> not have to talk to a DHCP on the LAN (which may or may not
>> be running) in order to get its IP address before it can
>> do anything else.
>
> I agree that a static address is preferable, although I find devices
> using DHCP only take a few moments to get an address.

And the load on the average home network is no problem.

gr, hwh

[Richard Evans]

True. My server throws FLAC or WAV at my Squeezeboxes, in real time,
with no problems at all.

Richard E.

[Richard Evans]

On 04/02/2012 10:08, Scott wrote:

>
> Any ideas what is going wrong? Is static IP preferable?

Another thought.

Any idea how many other people are using wireless networking where you
are. Where I live I used to get lots of wireless networking problems due
to interference from my neighbors.

Now I have everything either on wired connections, or using the 5Ghz
band. This is one reason why I didn't get a wi-fi radio, as none seem to
support 5Ghz.

Richard E.

[Scott]

On Sat, 4 Feb 2012 16:29:35 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>
wrote:

Thanks for the most informative reply. It's a bit like at the end of
the class when the teacher says 'And here's your homework for next
time.' :-)

Next time I will make careful notes and will try to get to the bottom
of these aspects.

[Brian Gregory [UK]]

"Scott" <newsg...@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7l0qi75vlh6rts2mp...@4ax.com...

I get the impression that the implementation of something to do with
establishing and re-establishing WiFi connections after a period of idle in
some routers does not work as well with the WiFi implementation in embedded
Linux (and Android phones and tablets) as it does with full Linux or Windows
on a PC.

BT Home Hubs get mentioned a quite often as having problems like this.

--

Brian Gregory. (In the UK)
n...@bgdsv.co.uk
To email me remove the letter vee.

[Mark O'Knee]

On 05/02/2012 10:36, Richard Evans wrote:
> On 04/02/2012 10:08, Scott wrote:
>
>>
>> Any ideas what is going wrong? Is static IP preferable?
>
> Another thought.
>
> Any idea how many other people are using wireless networking where you
> are. Where I live I used to get lots of wireless networking problems due
> to interference from my neighbors.

The way round this is to switch your wireless to use a channel that
doesn't conflict with the neighbours. Most wireless routers seem to
default to the same few channels (esp if everyone nearby is on the same
IPS and, say, all have BT home hubs). Use a tool like WirelessNetView
(on a PC with wireless, e.g. a laptop) to see what all the nearby
networks are using, and pick a channel that doesn't conflict with your
nearest neighbours.

[Brian Gregory [UK]]

"Mark O'Knee" <nu...@null.com> wrote in message
news:jgo3je$n3o$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

There are effectively only 3 WiFi channels in the 2.4GHz band because the
numbered channels are only 5MHz apart and all currently used WiFi standards
transmit a signal 20MHz wide (40MHz wide in the case of 802.11n in it's
highest speed modes).

So it's normal, and fairly good practise, to only use channels 1, 6 and 11.

Anyway WiFi is designed to cope with the same channel being used multiple
times. Things should just slow reasonably gracefully.

[Scott]

On Sat, 4 Feb 2012 16:29:35 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>
wrote:

It seems to be a failure at all levels. When starting, the station
name scrolls and the display shows 'Connecting' with the line symbol
rotating. At 'Stations', it shows 'Station Update form Reciva' with
the line rotating. At 'My Stations', it shows 'Loading' again with
the line rotating. Unplugging and restoring the power supply solves
the problem.

>
>1) is your router actually connected to the Internet

Yes 62% wi-fi strength. There is no facility to use an ethernet
cable.

>
>2) the radio will probably use a name not a raw IP number (which
> would be rather stupid actually) for the Radio Database Server
> so it needs to contact a DNS server to convert the name to
> an IP address

It says 'ESSID None' if that has any relevance.

>
>3) is your request to the Radio Database server getting through
> or timing out because your Internet connections is overloaded
> with other traffic (both upload and downloads)

Cannot be overloading as the only other device is my PC which should
only be checking for e-mails every five minutes.

>
>4) is the Radio Database server up or is it overloaded by other
> users

That's a possibility but seem unlikely as it seems to be a permanent
condition once it happens. It has occurred this morning when I assume
demand is low (due to many users presumably being a work as I would be
had I not had a day off!).

>
>Number 1 is probably the least likely, 4 next so, and 3 possible
>but unlikely. So is your radio pointed to a reliable DNS server.
>Ideally you should be running your own DNS server on your home
>LAN instead of relying on the ISP DNS servers, some of whom are
>notoriously bad.

Sounds like you are implicating 2. The DNS servers (there is
provision for three but I have only entered two) are provided by Zen
as my ISP. Should I be entering a third? I'll phone Zen next to see
if there are more. I don't understand the idea of running my own.

>
>If you want to try a test, when your radio is having trouble
>downloading Favorites, Genre, Location menu listing, go to
>your PC and try connecting to the website of your Radio
>Database server. (This is assuming your PC is pointed to
>the same DNS server as the radio.) If connection to that
>is poor or sluggish it ties in with the behavior of the radio.
>Ideally, before trying to use the web browser, you should
>run a DNS query on the name of the Radio Database server
>from the command line and see if it is slow or times out
>getting that information.

Reciva seems okay on BBC stations but the one that froze my radio (LBC
1152) does seem sluggish. I'm not sure how to run a DNS query.

>
>This of course has all assumed that you have an ethernet
>or rock solid WiFi connection from your radio to the
>router. If the WiFi connection from your radio to your
>router is flaky, then this will indeed result in sluggish
>to failure behavior in trying to get Favorite, Genre, Location
>menu information, let alone reliably playing the radio stream.
>
>WiFi stability can even be impaired by neighbors firing up
>their routers and initially trying to use the same channels
>that you are currently using.

Wi-fi should be fine though I am in a flat. Should I try altering the
channel number?

>So hope this helps to provide a picture as to the rather
>complex steps involved, and why a single simple answer to
>the problem cannot be provided.

It helps enormously and I am very grateful for all the efforts you
have gone to in order to assist me. You have probably saved me a lot
of money as I was blaming the hardware and thinking about a new radio,
when there is a lot of investigation needed before considering that
option.

[J G Miller]

On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 12:06:24h +0000, Scott explained:

> It seems to be a failure at all levels.

If there is a failure early in the chain, there cannot be a
failure further down the chain because the process never
got there. ;)

> When starting, the station name scrolls

If you get to the station name, than means that your radio
is indeed talking to the Radio Station Database site, so
the process has got quite a long way down the chain.

> and the display shows 'Connecting' with the line symbol
> rotating.

So that either means

1) the radio is not getting the data from the Radio Database
server in good time to connect to the actual radio station stream

2) Or that the radio station stream its-self is down.

> At 'Stations', it shows 'Station Update form Reciva'

Uhoh, you just mentioned the dreaded way "Reciva" which is a
notoriously bad Radio Database Server service.

> At 'My Stations', it shows 'Loading' again with the line
> rotating. Unplugging and restoring the power supply solves the problem.

Well this is not so unusual. I have a Noxon radio which, although
having WiFi, I just have connected via ethernet to the router.
If for some reason, as happens from time to time, the Noxon radio
is left powered up but not connected to a station for a long time,
it sometimes "disconnects" from the network and the only solution is to
reboot.

It may have something to do with a timeout being reached and the radio
just decides to give up trying -- at the point the time display (which
it synchronizes with an NTP server) disappears and the word
NOXON appears on the display. When switching on, I sometimes then
see the message "check your network connection".

Regardless, when I see Noxon on the display rather than
the time display I know I need to reboot.

Noxon uses the vTuner radio database server so this problem
is clearly independent of which commercial server is being used.

>>1) is your router actually connected to the Internet
>
> Yes 62% wi-fi strength. There is no facility to use an ethernet cable.

You are not actually answer the point there, unless you connect
from your router to a wireless WAN.

> It says 'ESSID None' if that has any relevance.

That has nothing to do with IP addresses but is related
to the ID you assign to your own local Wireless Network.

> That's a possibility but seem unlikely

Well I have read in the past of Reciva database server
as being unreliable.

> Should I be entering a third?

Well it certainly would not hurt to enter a third which is
independent of your two others.

> I don't understand the idea of running my own.

The way DNS works is that a process sends a request for
the IP number to the assigned DNS server. Each DNS
server only provides authoritative information for
its own domain eg myzen.co.uk. If the request is
for say somecompany.com, then that DNS server will
send a request to one of the seven (?) root DNS
servers asking who is the authority for somecompany.com.
The root server will send back the answer eg dns1.some.com
and then the ISP DNS server will send a request to
dns1.some.com for the IP number and wait for the answer
to come back, and then send that IP number to your process.

The exception to this lookup is that if your ISP DNS
server recently did a query for that company and still
had the information in its cache (which will only stays there
for at most the length of the TimeToLive setting), then the
ISP DNS server can use that temporarily stored information
to send the answer to your process.

The idea of running your own is that instead of relying
on the ISP, you setup your own DNS server which queries
the root names servers directly thereby bypassing the
ISP. Also your own DNS server can serve the DNS
information for your machines on your local LAN
eg mypc, myradio, mytv, and even myrouter.

> I'm not sure how to run a DNS query.

<http://support.microsoft.COM/kb/200525>

> Wi-fi should be fine though I am in a flat.

Being in an appartment building probably means that there
is an awful lot more WiFi electrosmog than if you were
in a house.

> Should I try altering the channel number?

Do you have to set this manually? I thought most
routers and devices just negotiated and found a
channel that was not being used by anybody else.

I am a little concerned that you say that there is
no E(?)SSID since when you setup your Wireless on
the router you should be giving it a name eg
Scotts-Wifi (unless you live next to the oatmeal
factory). I do hope you are using WPA2 security
and not WEP (which is about as effective as car locks on
1980s cars), although WPA is not immune to cracking,
and that you are using a strong pass phrase.

Also you should be aware that the one touch WPA
authorization on some routers is now compromised?

> You have probably saved me a lot of money as I was blaming
> the hardware and thinking about a new radio

Well if I were you, I would be concerned that you do have a radio
which uses Reciva rather than FrontierSilicon or vTuner, but
it is something with which you should be able to live.

QUOTE

2 Dec 2010 I accept that Reciva is unreliable for many ...

UNQUOTE

UNQUOTE

It is becoming increasingly unreliable. It connects to my broadband
correctly, but frequently stays 'Connecting' indefinitely, i.e overnight.

UNQUOTE

You should have a look at the forum

<http://recivarefuge.NET/>

which may help to give some further clues as to the vagaries
of your connection with the Reciva Radio Database server.


Is this the radio by the way?

<http://www.ccrane.COM/radios/wifi-radios/tangent-quattro-wifi-internet-radio.aspx>

[J G Miller]

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 15:24:58 +0000, J G Miller wrote:

> Is this the radio by the way?
>
> <http://www.ccrane.COM/radios/wifi-radios/tangent-quattro-wifi-internet-radio.aspx>

If it is that radio, the specification clearly states

"Ethernet input jack for direct connection to a router"

So there is no reason not to try with a wired connection to the router.

[bolta...@boltar.world]

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 15:24:58 +0000 (UTC)

J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote:

>Well this is not so unusual. I have a Noxon radio which, although
>having WiFi, I just have connected via ethernet to the router.
>If for some reason, as happens from time to time, the Noxon radio
>is left powered up but not connected to a station for a long time,
>it sometimes "disconnects" from the network and the only solution is to
>reboot.

Its a pretty sorry state of affairs that we've got to the point where a
radio needs to be rebooted because its lost connection to a device a few metres
away which in turn was getting the programming down a wire. Marconi would be
turning in his grave.

B2003

[hwh]

The producer of said equipment should be ashamed of himself. Wireless
should work properly over a few yards.

gr, hwh

[J G Miller]

On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 15:49:48h +0000, Boltar 2003 opined:

> Its a pretty sorry state of affairs that we've got to the point where a
> radio needs to be rebooted because its lost connection to a device

You are not understanding the problem -- it is not that the device
is dropping the connection, but that if the device is left idle
for long periods, it goes into a "network disconnected" state.

[bolta...@boltar.world]

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 16:48:34 +0000 (UTC)

J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote:

Why should that require a reboot? When you switch it back on it should
automatically reconnect without prompting from the user. If a net radio isn't
as easy to use and idiot proof as an FM radio then you might just as well
use a PC to listen to online radio.

B2003

[Scott]

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 15:24:58 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>
wrote:

>On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 12:06:24h +0000, Scott explained:
>
>> It seems to be a failure at all levels.
>
>If there is a failure early in the chain, there cannot be a
>failure further down the chain because the process never
>got there. ;)

I see what you mean. It's one level causing a multi-featured failure.

>
>> When starting, the station name scrolls
>
>If you get to the station name, than means that your radio
>is indeed talking to the Radio Station Database site, so
>the process has got quite a long way down the chain.

Could it not be remembering from when it was last used?

>
>> and the display shows 'Connecting' with the line symbol
>> rotating.
>
>So that either means
>
>1) the radio is not getting the data from the Radio Database
> server in good time to connect to the actual radio station stream
>
>2) Or that the radio station stream its-self is down.
>
>> At 'Stations', it shows 'Station Update form Reciva'
>
>Uhoh, you just mentioned the dreaded way "Reciva" which is a
>notoriously bad Radio Database Server service.

Maybe this is the beginning of the solution.

>
>> At 'My Stations', it shows 'Loading' again with the line
>> rotating. Unplugging and restoring the power supply solves the problem.
>
>Well this is not so unusual. I have a Noxon radio which, although
>having WiFi, I just have connected via ethernet to the router.
>If for some reason, as happens from time to time, the Noxon radio
>is left powered up but not connected to a station for a long time,
>it sometimes "disconnects" from the network and the only solution is to
>reboot.
>
>It may have something to do with a timeout being reached and the radio
>just decides to give up trying -- at the point the time display (which
>it synchronizes with an NTP server) disappears and the word
>NOXON appears on the display. When switching on, I sometimes then
>see the message "check your network connection".
>
>Regardless, when I see Noxon on the display rather than
>the time display I know I need to reboot.
>
>Noxon uses the vTuner radio database server so this problem
>is clearly independent of which commercial server is being used.
>
>>>1) is your router actually connected to the Internet
>>
>> Yes 62% wi-fi strength. There is no facility to use an ethernet cable.
>
>You are not actually answer the point there, unless you connect
>from your router to a wireless WAN.

I spotted this on re-reading. The router has been connected for 59
days continuously, according to Zen technical support. The download
speed is 37 Mbps, so I am assuming no difficulties in this department.

Yes, channel is 'Auto'. I did not realise this until I spoke to Zen.

>
>I am a little concerned that you say that there is
>no E(?)SSID since when you setup your Wireless on
>the router you should be giving it a name eg
>Scotts-Wifi (unless you live next to the oatmeal
>factory). I do hope you are using WPA2 security
>and not WEP (which is about as effective as car locks on
>1980s cars), although WPA is not immune to cracking,
>and that you are using a strong pass phrase.

The wireless has a name which shows up as the network on the radio.

>
>Also you should be aware that the one touch WPA
>authorization on some routers is now compromised?

It's WPA2-PZK(AES).

>
>> You have probably saved me a lot of money as I was blaming
>> the hardware and thinking about a new radio
>
>Well if I were you, I would be concerned that you do have a radio
>which uses Reciva rather than FrontierSilicon or vTuner, but
>it is something with which you should be able to live.

I am now ...

>
>QUOTE
>
> 2 Dec 2010 I accept that Reciva is unreliable for many ...
>
>UNQUOTE
>
>UNQUOTE
>
> It is becoming increasingly unreliable. It connects to my broadband
> correctly, but frequently stays 'Connecting' indefinitely, i.e overnight.
>
>UNQUOTE
>
>You should have a look at the forum
>
> <http://recivarefuge.NET/>
>
>which may help to give some further clues as to the vagaries
>of your connection with the Reciva Radio Database server.
>
>
>Is this the radio by the way?
>
><http://www.ccrane.COM/radios/wifi-radios/tangent-quattro-wifi-internet-radio.aspx>

Essentially. That's the US version and mine is red.

[Scott]

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 15:28:49 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>
wrote:

Definitely not. Must be a different model or different territorial
variation.

The position has greatly deteriorated today. I tried a factory reset
and now I cannot get connection with Reciva either using either DHCP
or manual settings with Zen DNS or Google DNS.

I am thinking about
http://www.pure.com/products/product.asp?Product=VL-60967&Category=Internet%20Radio
to replace both the Internet radio and DAB.

Standing what you say about databases, do you have any knowledge of
the one used by Pure http://new.thelounge.com/uk ?

[Scott]

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 15:49:48 +0000 (UTC), bolta...@boltar.world
wrote:

Bring back Baird :-)

[hwh]

On 2/6/12 7:42 PM, Scott wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 15:28:49 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 15:24:58 +0000, J G Miller wrote:
>>
>>> Is this the radio by the way?
>>>
>>> <http://www.ccrane.COM/radios/wifi-radios/tangent-quattro-wifi-internet-radio.aspx>
>>
>> If it is that radio, the specification clearly states
>>
>> "Ethernet input jack for direct connection to a router"
>>
>> So there is no reason not to try with a wired connection to the router.
>
> Definitely not. Must be a different model or different territorial
> variation.
>
> The position has greatly deteriorated today. I tried a factory reset
> and now I cannot get connection with Reciva either using either DHCP
> or manual settings with Zen DNS or Google DNS.

The factory reset might have wiped your password for the router. Perhaps
you should set it (as well as other things) again.

gr, hwh

[alexd]

Brian Gregory [UK] (for it is he) wrote:

> There are effectively only 3 WiFi channels in the 2.4GHz band because the
> numbered channels are only 5MHz apart and all currently used WiFi
> standards transmit a signal 20MHz wide (40MHz wide in the case of 802.11n
> in it's highest speed modes).
>
> So it's normal, and fairly good practise, to only use channels 1, 6 and
> 11.

Really? Surely if everyone else is centred on 1, 6 or 11, you'd be better
off using channels on different centres [eg 13]?

--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEs...@ale.cx)
19:21:54 up 25 days, 22:51, 3 users, load average: 0.01, 0.20, 0.28
"People believe any quote they read on the internet
if it fits their preconceived notions." - Martin Luther King

[J G Miller]

Op maandag, 6 februari, 2012, om 19:56:34u +0100, schreef HwH:

> The factory reset might have wiped your password for the router.

It is more than probable that the factory reset not only wiped
that but all of the network/wireless settings.

[Scott]

I did that. Connection to the router seems okay. Now it is saying
'Network Error. DNS servers invalid'.

[J G Miller]

On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 18:31:29h +0000, Scott explained:

> Could it not be remembering from when it was last used?

It depends on how much memory your radio has and whether or
not it has a history feature. If the radio is powered off
though, that will disappear.

> I spotted this on re-reading. The router has been connected for 59 days
> continuously, according to Zen technical support.

> The download speed is 37 Mbps

That is impressive. Remember though that this "speed" reading
is not so much a speed as the "width" of your download "pipe".

> Yes, channel is 'Auto'. I did not realise this until I spoke to Zen.

That should be fine then.

> The wireless has a name which shows up as the network on the radio.

Okay that is fine.

> It's WPA2-PZK(AES).

Excellent, that is the best for security (without going to
the added trouble of running a radius server which is overkill
for a home network).

From everything you have explained, it seems to me that you are
just suffering from poor connectivity to the Reciva Database Server
because all of your local settings and connection speed indicate
that everything is in good working condition.

In the other posting you ask

"Standing what you say about databases, do you have any knowledge of
the one used by Pure http://new.thelounge.com/uk ?"

No experience at all with that one. I would be a little wary of
a database server from the same company as the radio brand, because
if the company badging the radios goes bankrupt, the server goes
as well making the radio useless (unless it is upnp/DNLA client capable
in which case there is a small probability that you can use Mediatomb
as a local radio database server for MP3 streams).

If I was buying an Internet radio I would recommend Roberts Stream 83i,
or take a look at the Noxon models from Terratec, as well as the
Logitech Squeeze devices.

I am disappointed that Terratec now offer Noxon radio models with
one speaker (rather than zero or two), except for the "stereo unit"
style model, and I think slightly less features (file playing capabilities)
than the original iRadio 2.

But if you only want monophonic sound I guess that one speaker is
good enough.

[hwh]

On 2/6/12 8:45 PM, Scott wrote:
>> The factory reset might have wiped your password for the router. Perhaps
>> you should set it (as well as other things) again.
>>
> I did that. Connection to the router seems okay. Now it is saying
> 'Network Error. DNS servers invalid'.

You set the 'radio' to use automatic configuration via DHCP?
If so you could try to unplug it and retry after a few seconds.

gr, hwh

[Scott]

I did that too, but without waiting a few seconds. I'll try again.
I'm thinking about a replacement. Roberts and Noxon seem to be
getting recommended over Pure.

[hwh]

Might as well get one with an ethernet connection then. Wired networks
are more reliable.

gr, hwh

[Scott]

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 19:55:03 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>
wrote:

Point taken, though Imagination Technologies is a huge player in
chipsets http://www.imgtec.com/.

>
>If I was buying an Internet radio I would recommend Roberts Stream 83i,
>or take a look at the Noxon models from Terratec, as well as the
>Logitech Squeeze devices.
>

I like the look of the Roberts. It reviews well and is a lot cheaper
than the Avanti Flow.

>I am disappointed that Terratec now offer Noxon radio models with
>one speaker (rather than zero or two), except for the "stereo unit"
>style model, and I think slightly less features (file playing capabilities)
>than the original iRadio 2.
>
>But if you only want monophonic sound I guess that one speaker is
>good enough.

It's the kitchen, so mono should be okay. I wonder if it is DAB+
upgradeable though that will be a long way off.

[Scott]

On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 21:12:27 +0100, hwh

The Roberts Stream 83i seems to have this capability. However, since
most of the population seem to get wireless to work okay I can't see
why it would not work (as long as I am not microwaving my supper, that
is!).

[J G Miller]

On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 20:39:01h +0000, Scott wrote:

> The Roberts Stream 83i seems to have this capability.

I have used an 83i in WiFi mode only in various parts of
a house with a D-Link 855 router and I never had any
connectivity problems. Doing a scan of wifi networks
showed that there were 4-5 operating in the vicinity
and using a high gain antenna strategically placed,
even found another 3-4 more.

The Roberts uses the Frontier Silicon Radio Database
and scores very highly for reliability.

The only negative points about the radio were that
on initial attempts it kept saying unknown format
when trying to listen to some podcasts sources which
I have no problem connecting to on the Noxon. I do
not know if this was just a temporary problem though.

Although the feature is touted -- last.fm -- this
is only accessible if you take out a subscription.

I was not successful in getting the Roberts to use
Mediatomb supplied redirected MP3 streams which actually
works with the Noxon iRadio 2, but this is a highly
specialized trick, and the problem may have been needing
to customize the XML header information. Otherwise
the upnp client feature of the Roberts works very well.

The more one plays around with these devices one comes
to realize that none of them are perfect and some have
better features in one area than another.

And the other negative point about the Roberts is that
it only has five presets unlike the nine on the Noxon 2
and the remote control is not full size but a half size type.

The problem is for people buying now though is that the
Noxon model I have which I would thoroughly recommend
is no longer manufactured (it is 2006 vintage), and you
do have to connect your own powered speakers.

<http://reviews.cnet.co.UK/internet-radios/terratec-noxon-2-audio-review-49271821/>

And some people do not like the blue display either.

[Scott]

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 21:00:50 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>
wrote:

Thanks for all your assistance.

I am inclining towards the Roberts now. I think I can live with the
limitations (and without last fm). Do you need to use the remote?

Looking at the Frontier Silicon portal
http://www.wifiradio-frontier.com/setupapp/fs/asp/Help/about.asp?lngy=eng
it does say that their technology is found in Pure products. Does
this mean that if Pure goes under the radio should continue to work?

[hwh]

On 2/6/12 9:39 PM, Scott wrote:
> The Roberts Stream 83i seems to have this capability. However, since
> most of the population seem to get wireless to work okay I can't see
> why it would not work (as long as I am not microwaving my supper, that
> is!).

Depends on where you live. We get 40-50 networks here, and Wi-Fi radios
do not support 5 GHz.

gr, hwh

[J G Miller]

On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 20:34:57h +0000, Scott wrote:

> Point taken, though Imagination Technologies is a huge player in
> chipsets http://www.imgtec.com/.

True and unlikely to go broke: I just feel a little uneasy about
being tied in to one company.

> It's the kitchen, so mono should be okay. I wonder if it is DAB+
> upgradeable though that will be a long way off.

The Roberts is not DAB+ upgradeable, but the DAB sensitivity and
peformance is very good.

The stereo sound from the Roberts two little speakers is pretty good
and for a kitchen it is an ideal model to use. It also has a USB
slot so you can plug in a memory stick or a USB card adapter for use
with SD memory cards.

The instructions do warn not to connect a USB disk though.

At the time, June 2010, the best price was on Amazon for
GBP 125 (including delivery).

Currently one Amazon retailer is offering at GBP 120 (including delivery).

<http://www.amazon.co.UK/Roberts-Stream-Stereo-Internet-Speaker/dp/B002VEN10O>

So not much movement in the price over the past 18 months.

[Scott]

I think it's about four here. I certainly wired my computer for
performance/reliability reasons as it is mission critical. I would
take a chance with the radio to avoid drilling holes etc but the
Roberts provides the option of wired connection. The Tangent worked
okay wirelessly while it was running (until now that is, as it seems
to be 'cream-crackered').

[J G Miller]

On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 21:10:27h +0000, Scott wrote:

> Do you need to use the remote?

Actually the Roberts 83i is remarkably easy to use without
the remote (unlike the Noxon 2 I have).

You do have to be a little patient with the layout of the menus
(for changing from say DAB to FM to MediaPlayer) but within
the Internet Radio sub-menu all is standard and is of the
rotating dial type select and then press type operation.

> Does this mean that if Pure goes under the radio should continue to work?

Which radio? Your question only applies to Pure radios which used
the Frontier Silicon Radio Database. I was under the impression,
that their newer models use The Lounge which is their own Radio Database server.
A web search reveals that Wikipedia confirms this notion.

QUOTE

While many internet radios use third party web portals like Reciva
or Frontier Silicon's online portal. PURE's internet radios use a
manufacturer managed web portal called 'The Lounge'.

UNQUOTE

Frontier Silicon is independent of Pure, so if Pure were ever to go
broke, it should have no effect whatsoever on a Roberts radio.

[J G Miller]

Forgot to mention you should have a look at this web forum site
and on it there is this topic

<http://www.yournetradio.VOM/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=238>

Now obviously that is a minor bug that they say they are going to fix,
but the important point to note is that Roberts are maintaining the
firmware and issuing updates which is a good sign of "support".

You might also like to look at the topic where they discussed in 2010
about "The Lounge" being unavailable for several hours, which may
partly answer your question about its reliability.

<http://www.yournetradio.COM/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=74>

[Scott]

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 21:30:26 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>
wrote:

>On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 21:10:27h +0000, Scott wrote:
>
>> Do you need to use the remote?
>
>Actually the Roberts 83i is remarkably easy to use without
>the remote (unlike the Noxon 2 I have).

Good news.

>
>You do have to be a little patient with the layout of the menus
>(for changing from say DAB to FM to MediaPlayer) but within
>the Internet Radio sub-menu all is standard and is of the
>rotating dial type select and then press type operation.

I like to think that patience is one of my virtues! I think I can
live with that.

>
>> Does this mean that if Pure goes under the radio should continue to work?
>
>Which radio? Your question only applies to Pure radios which used
>the Frontier Silicon Radio Database. I was under the impression,
>that their newer models use The Lounge which is their own Radio Database server.
>A web search reveals that Wikipedia confirms this notion.
>
>QUOTE
>
> While many internet radios use third party web portals like Reciva
> or Frontier Silicon's online portal. PURE's internet radios use a
> manufacturer managed web portal called 'The Lounge'.
>
>UNQUOTE
>
>Frontier Silicon is independent of Pure, so if Pure were ever to go
>broke, it should have no effect whatsoever on a Roberts radio.

Okay, I understand now. I was not sure if 'The Lounge' was an
independent portal or simply capacity leased by Pure on Frontier's
site and branded by them.

The Roberts 83i is now in pole position. Thanks for your assistance.

[tony sayer]

In article <jgosqs$lnp$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, bolta...@boltar.world
scribeth thus

Yes indeedy folks.

A "Wire"?, doesn't have the same ring about it as a "Wireless" now does
it;?...
--
Tony Sayer

[hwh]

We have a Musicpal that does wired and Wi-Fi flawlessly. Sometimes it
just hangs, but that does not seem to be network related. The clock
stops as well.

gr, hwh

[Brian Gregory [UK]]

"alexd" <trof...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:18991686....@ale.cx...

> Brian Gregory [UK] (for it is he) wrote:
>
>> There are effectively only 3 WiFi channels in the 2.4GHz band because the
>> numbered channels are only 5MHz apart and all currently used WiFi
>> standards transmit a signal 20MHz wide (40MHz wide in the case of 802.11n
>> in it's highest speed modes).
>>
>> So it's normal, and fairly good practise, to only use channels 1, 6 and
>> 11.
>
> Really? Surely if everyone else is centred on 1, 6 or 11, you'd be better
> off using channels on different centres [eg 13]?

Yes, 13 might be good if it's allowed in your country and all the equipment
you use will accept that you're allowed to use it.

To be honest I'm not at all sure how well WiFi copes with interference that
only covers some of the bandwidth you're using.

--

Brian Gregory. (In the UK)
n...@bgdsv.co.uk
To email me remove the letter vee.

[Richard Evans]

On 09/02/2012 15:11, Brian Gregory [UK] wrote:
> "alexd"<trof...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

>> Really? Surely if everyone else is centred on 1, 6 or 11, you'd be better
>> off using channels on different centres [eg 13]?
>
> Yes, 13 might be good if it's allowed in your country and all the equipment
> you use will accept that you're allowed to use it.
>
> To be honest I'm not at all sure how well WiFi copes with interference that
> only covers some of the bandwidth you're using.
>

Well enough about the theory. In practice I have about 6 other 2.4 Ghz
signals to compete with, and my wi-fi used to frequently fail to
connect, and frequently used to slow to a crawl, and be effectively
unusable. It would work about 80% of the time, and the other 20% would
drive me mad. I tried using Net Stumbler to find out what channel the
others were on, and setting mine to a channel I thought would be
clearest, and that helped a bit, but I still had frequent problems.

So I got a dual band router, and put a dual band card in my laptop, and
using 5Ghz I have never had any connection problems, the connection is
perfect every time.

Richard E.

[bolta...@boltar.world]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 03:11:31 +0000
Richard Evans <rp.evan...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>Well enough about the theory. In practice I have about 6 other 2.4 Ghz
>signals to compete with, and my wi-fi used to frequently fail to
>connect, and frequently used to slow to a crawl, and be effectively
>unusable. It would work about 80% of the time, and the other 20% would
>drive me mad. I tried using Net Stumbler to find out what channel the
>others were on, and setting mine to a channel I thought would be
>clearest, and that helped a bit, but I still had frequent problems.
>
>So I got a dual band router, and put a dual band card in my laptop, and
>using 5Ghz I have never had any connection problems, the connection is
>perfect every time.

I had the same problem. I just solved it with a 5m long ethernet cable.
Not only is it faster and more secure, it also never drops the connection.
I doubt I'll ever go back to using wifi at home.

B2003

[Richard Evans]

On 10/02/2012 09:32, bolta...@boltar.world wrote:

>>
>> So I got a dual band router, and put a dual band card in my laptop, and
>> using 5Ghz I have never had any connection problems, the connection is
>> perfect every time.
>
> I had the same problem. I just solved it with a 5m long ethernet cable.
> Not only is it faster and more secure, it also never drops the connection.
> I doubt I'll ever go back to using wifi at home.

I have everything except my laptop connected with wires.
(Actually at the moment I have 2 laptops, my old one and my new one).
For a lap top wireless is very useful, but for everything else I now use
wired.

When I first got my Squeezebox Boom, I tried it wireless. It is about 10
feet from my router, so I thought it might be OK. But quite soon I
started to get stuttering when playing FLAC. I tried limiting the bit
rate, which makes Squeeze Center transcode from FLAC to MP3, and that
fixed the stuttering, but there were still annoying episodes when it
would simply stop playing, and if I reset it, it would fail to connect.
So in the end I decided it was worth making a small hole in the wall and
running a cable.

I never got a wi-fi radio, because I could never find a good one that
does 5Ghz wireless.

Richard E.

[Richard Evans]

On 06/02/2012 21:11, hwh wrote:

>
> Depends on where you live. We get 40-50 networks here, and Wi-Fi radios
> do not support 5 GHz.
>
> gr, hwh
>

40-50 OMG. I only get about 6, and that is enough to make 2.4 Ghz
unreliable.

[Richard Evans]

On 06/02/2012 21:24, Scott wrote:

>
> I think it's about four here.

That might be enough to cause a problem, as there are only 3 non
overlapping channels.

I see up to about 6 of my neighbors networks, and up to about 4 of them
can be strong signals, and that was enough to cause problems.

When I had my Squeezebox Boom connected wirelessly, it quite often used
to completely loose it's connection to my router, even though it is only
about 10 feet away, so I ended up running a cable to it.

I used to have my Laptop on 2.4 Ghz, and often ended up having to move
it right next to my router, because it slowed to a complete crawl in the
middle of a file transfer. And even right next to the router, it often
didn't connect at full speed.

Now I have a dual band router, and a dual band card in my Laptop, I just
use 5Ghz, and I never have any connection problems.

> I certainly wired my computer for
> performance/reliability reasons as it is mission critical. I would
> take a chance with the radio to avoid drilling holes etc but the
> Roberts provides the option of wired connection. The Tangent worked
> okay wirelessly while it was running (until now that is, as it seems
> to be 'cream-crackered').

Do you have any other wireless devices you could try, to see if you have
connection problems, at the same time that your radio is not connecting?

However in another of your posts you mentioned a DNS error.
If you are having trouble connecting to your router, then I would expect
it to fail before it got to that stage.

Richard E.

[Richard Evans]

On 06/02/2012 16:45, hwh wrote:

>
> The producer of said equipment should be ashamed of himself. Wireless
> should work properly over a few yards.

I think the problem was that the channels in the 2.4 GHz band where
allocated for mode B. But then people started using mode G, which has a
wider bandwidth, but they didn't redefine the channels, they simply
allowed people to select any of the Mode B channels, so we ended up with
lots of wireless channels overlapping each other.

Oh one thing that helped me for a while. I set my router to mode B only.
I figured that a narrow band signal would be more likely to find some
clear spectrum and less likely to be interfered with. At the time my
internet connection was only about 5 Meg, so having only 11 Meg wireless
didn't make much difference, and I did get a much more reliable
connection for a while. But eventually there were even more interfering
wi-fi signals, and I started getting frequent problems, even using mode B.

Now I'm on 5Ghz, the connection is always solid. Only thing that isn't
perfect, is that I can only get mode A to work. It seems that the mode N
on my router is not compatible with the Mode N on my wireless card. That
means I only get 54 Kb/s, but that makes no difference for web browsing,
it only an issue for local file transfers.

Shame they don't seem to make 5Ghz wi-fi radios, and a shame you can't
upgrade the wi-fi cards in them.

Richard E.

[Richard Evans]

On 06/02/2012 17:02, bolta...@boltar.world wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 16:48:34 +0000 (UTC)

>>
>> You are not understanding the problem -- it is not that the device
>> is dropping the connection, but that if the device is left idle
>> for long periods, it goes into a "network disconnected" state.
>
> Why should that require a reboot? When you switch it back on it should
> automatically reconnect without prompting from the user.

Just what I was going to say. Surely it wouldn't be that hard for the
software to figure out that it needs to reset it's network connection.

> If a net radio isn't
> as easy to use and idiot proof as an FM radio then you might just as well
> use a PC to listen to online radio.

Well a PC isn't as portable as a wi-fi radio, but I get your point ;-)

Richard E.

[Richard Evans]

On 06/02/2012 21:58, tony sayer wrote:

>
> A "Wire"?, doesn't have the same ring about it as a "Wireless" now does
> it;?...

And a wire makes the radio less portable.

[Richard Evans]

On 06/02/2012 19:55, J G Miller wrote:
> On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 18:31:29h +0000, Scott explained:

>

>> It's WPA2-PZK(AES).
>
> Excellent, that is the best for security (without going to
> the added trouble of running a radius server which is overkill
> for a home network).

Some routers also have an access control list. I have this set up on
mine. It probably adds a bit more security, as it will reject any
attempt to connect, from a device that has a MAC address it doesn't
recognize.

Richard E.

[hwh]

That is so easy to circumvent! Google for 'MAC address spoofing'. It's
about as useless as WEP encryption or hiding the SSID.

gr, hwh

[Richard Evans]

True. However with everything also encrypted, they won't know which MAC
address they need to spoof.

But then again, I suppose that if they can't break the WEP2 Encryption,
then they wouldn't be able to connect anyway, which is why I'm not
certain whether it actually adds any security.

Richard E.

[Richard Evans]

On 12/02/2012 11:01, Richard Evans wrote:

>
> But then again, I suppose that if they can't break the WEP2 Encryption,
> then they wouldn't be able to connect anyway, which is why I'm not
> certain whether it actually adds any security.

I suppose what it does do, is make it harder for people to connect by
trying encryption keys, as they would also have to guess the MAC address.

Richard E.

[hwh]

If you use WPA2, they can't read the addresses. But they can't break in
to the network then, which means that the ACL has no use.

gr, hwh

[J G Miller]

On Sunday, February 12th, 2012, at 10:21:53h +0000, Richard Evans wrote:

> Shame they don't seem to make 5Ghz wi-fi radios, and a shame you can't
> upgrade the wi-fi cards in them.

But if the radio has an ethernet connection you can still use 5 GHz WiFi
with the purchase of an ethernet/Wifi (5 GHz) bridge. If the ethernet/WiFi
bridge has multipled ethernet ports then (without having to purchase a switch
in addition) you can connect up various ethernet wired devices at that location
to make use of the 5 GHz WiFi link to your router.

[Richard Evans]

That's an interesting idea, just as long as it's possible to get small
enough bridge, so that the setup is still reasonably portable. It might
also help if you could find a way to attach the bridge to the back of
the radio.

[hwh]

If it must be small take a look at the Apple Airport Express.

gr, hwh

[bolta...@boltar.world]

On Sun, 12 Feb 2012 11:01:52 +0000
Richard Evans <rp.evan...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>True. However with everything also encrypted, they won't know which MAC
>address they need to spoof.
>
>But then again, I suppose that if they can't break the WEP2 Encryption,
>then they wouldn't be able to connect anyway, which is why I'm not
>certain whether it actually adds any security.

You can't encrypt the MAC address otherwise how would anything connect in the
first place before any encryption keys had been swapped? MAC is part of the
low level frame information, WPA is done on the data, not the frame header.
AFAIK anyway.

B2003

[Richard Evans]

On 13/02/2012 10:12, bolta...@boltar.world wrote:

>
> You can't encrypt the MAC address otherwise how would anything connect in the
> first place before any encryption keys had been swapped? MAC is part of the
> low level frame information, WPA is done on the data, not the frame header.
> AFAIK anyway.
>
> B2003
>

I find this a bit surprising, so I'm going to do some Googling.

For one thing I don't see any reason why keys would need to be swapped,
as you set the key in your router, and you enter the same key into the
device you are connecting to the network.

Also I don't see any reason why the encryption couldn't be at a lower
layer than the Ethernet frame, but perhaps some Googling will tell me
which layer is encrypted.

Richard E.

[bolta...@boltar.world]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:31:51 +0000
Richard Evans <rp.evan...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>For one thing I don't see any reason why keys would need to be swapped,
>as you set the key in your router, and you enter the same key into the
>device you are connecting to the network.

Fair point, I was thinking of how ssh worked.

>Also I don't see any reason why the encryption couldn't be at a lower
>layer than the Ethernet frame, but perhaps some Googling will tell me
>which layer is encrypted.

On normal ethernet the frame is the lowest network level. Below it is the
physical transport layer. I assume wifi is similar. If you encrpyt the
entire frame then due to the way encryption works the data representing the
encrypted MAC will be different each time a frame is sent even if you transmit
the exact same data so if one of side misses a frame it'll be out of step and
won't be able to decrypt the next frame properly to find which MAC it was
intended for since you could have multiple devices on the same network.
If I'm missing something here let me know.

B2003

[Richard Evans]

On 13/02/2012 10:12, bolta...@boltar.world wrote:

> MAC is part of the
> low level frame information, WPA is done on the data, not the frame header.
> AFAIK anyway.

After a bit of Googling and a bit of thinking, and I think you are
probably right.

They say that MAC addresses can not be encrypted, or else the computers
wouldn't know which packets are intended for them. Well I was thinking
that since the encryption key is pre entered into each device, each
device could receive and decrypt the MAC address of each packet it hears
transmitted, and ignore it if it is not the intended recipient. But
thinking about it, that method would have a hole in it, as a hacker
could just receive the encrypted MAC address and then re use it without
decrypting it. This would mean that there would have to be some system
of frequently changing the key used for encryption of the MAC address.
This could be done between 2 devices communicating wirelessly with each
other, but other devices on the network might not get all the keys, and
so might not understand all the MAC addresses transmitted. Then again,
perhaps this wouldn't matter too much. If a device receives a MAC
address not intended for it, and then decrypts that address using the
wrong key, then chances are the 'decrypted' address it ends up with
would not be it's own address anyway, so it would still just ignore the
data packet. On the rare occasions where an in correctly decrypted MAC
address is mistakenly accepted, the device incorrectly receiving it,
should realize something is wrong, because the data would also be in
correctly received, and so would not be verified, and so would be discarded.

However reading on the web, it would seem that it is not done this way.
Perhaps it's all just a little too complex, and just so much easier to
encrypt only the data, and not the MAC address.

Presumably if a hacker tried to transmit a packet into the network,
using one of the un encrypted MAC addresses. That packet would be
rejected by the device it is addressed to, as the data would not be
correctly verified.

So perhaps, since I'm using WPA2, I might as well switch of my MAC
address filtering.

Richard E.

[Richard Evans]

Oh and I also read there is a potential hole in WPA2 security.
I think this hole is associated with On Touch connection, which has been
added to some devices, but I'm not sure. Well I have my one touch
deactivated anyway, as I found it was not all that simple to use anyway,
and thought I'd rather just enter the Encryption key manually.

Richard E.

[Richard Evans]

On 13/02/2012 11:03, bolta...@boltar.world wrote:

>
> On normal ethernet the frame is the lowest network level. Below it is the
> physical transport layer. I assume wifi is similar. If you encrpyt the
> entire frame then due to the way encryption works the data representing the
> encrypted MAC will be different each time a frame is sent even if you transmit
> the exact same data so if one of side misses a frame it'll be out of step and
> won't be able to decrypt the next frame properly to find which MAC it was
> intended for since you could have multiple devices on the same network.
> If I'm missing something here let me know.

I think you are probably on the right lines. Thinking more about it,
Encrypting MAC addresses, would create a number of complications, making
the whole setup a fair bit more complicated. I think it could be done,
but searching the web, it would seem that it isn't actually done.

Richard E.

[bolta...@boltar.world]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 11:40:49 +0000
Richard Evans <rp.evan...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>I think you are probably on the right lines. Thinking more about it,
>Encrypting MAC addresses, would create a number of complications, making
>the whole setup a fair bit more complicated. I think it could be done,
>but searching the web, it would seem that it isn't actually done.

Probably the military do something like that but I suspect for a home network
its a bit overkill :) Anyway , I'm sure its only a matter of time before
someone manages to crack WPA if they haven't done so already and are just
keeping quiet about it.

B2003

[J G Miller]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 11:37:22 +0000, Richard Evans wrote:

> Oh and I also read there is a potential hole in WPA2 security. I think
> this hole is associated with On Touch connection

Yes WiFi Protected Setup WPS.

The Department of Homeland Security recommend disabling WPS on all wireless
routers. The problem is, not all wireless routers allow it to be disabled.

<http://www.kb.cert.ORG/vuls/id/723755>

WPS uses only an 8 digit so can now easily be brute force
cracked by a PC or laptop with a high power CPU in a few
hours.

<http://www.theregister.co.UK/2011/12/29/wi_fi_not_protected/>

Details of software available at

<http://www.theverge.COM/2011/12/30/2670137/wps-wifi-exploits-released>

> I'd rather just enter the Encryption key manually.

Which I hope is more than 20 characters in length.

[J G Miller]

On Monday, February 13th, 2012, at 12:26:09h +0000, Boltar 2003 wrote:

> Anyway , I'm sure its only a matter of time before someone
> manages to crack WPA if they haven't done so already

WPA was cracked back in 2008, which is why you should be using WPA2.

For extra security, you can switch to the next level up WPA2 enterprise
and use a radius server to do user/password lookups rather than use
WPA2 personal with encrypted keys

<http://www.nowiressecurity.COM/articles/move_to_wpa-enterprise_wi-fi_encryption.ham>

But it seems rather over the top for a WiFi connection to a
WiFi radio which will not have WPA2 enterprise capability
anyways ;)

[bolta...@boltar.world]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:21:36 +0000 (UTC)
J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote:
>But it seems rather over the top for a WiFi connection to a
>WiFi radio which will not have WPA2 enterprise capability
>anyways ;)

Its all over the top anyway just to avoid using a 2 quid piece of cable.

B2003

[Richard Evans]

On 13/02/2012 14:14, J G Miller wrote:

>
>> I'd rather just enter the Encryption key manually.
>
> Which I hope is more than 20 characters in length.

Actually No, I thought 8 characters was usually considerd to be
sufficient. Perhaps I should string a few words together to make
something longer.

[Richard Evans]

Well it's not the cost of the cable, it's the convenience of being able
to move from room to room without having to keep plugging in network
cables all the time.

[Richard Evans]

OK Now I have a 20 character string.
Although it then took me a few minutes to figure out how to enter the
new string into Windows 7. It kept trying to reconnect with the old
string, failing, and not not asking me for the new one.

[Scott]

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 21:14:13 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>
wrote:

[helpfully]

Thank you very much for your assistance. I bought a Roberts Stream
83i yesterday from John Lewis for £130. It was worth paying a small
premium for 'instant gratification'.

Set-up was succcessful, with no difficulties so far.

Thank you once again Mr Miller for your assistance.

Scott

[J G Miller]

On Monday, February 13th, 2012, at 19:52:31h +0000, Scott wrote:

> It was worth paying a small premium
> for 'instant gratification'.

Well there is always that price to pay, and in this
case GBP 10 is not excessive, especially if, there
are problems you can easily return the unit to the store
rather than all the hassle of parcel pickup.

> Thank you once again Mr Miller for your assistance.

You are most welcome.

Now you need to get busy on your PC setting up a uPnP
server (if you have not already done so) and getting
your music and downloaded podcasts accessible ;)

Incidentally, how is the DAB reception -- I would expect
national, regional and the Glasgow (11C) multiplexes are solid,
but can you see any flicker on the meter for adjacent
Ayr local multiplex (11B)?

And here is another question -- what is the firmware
version on the radio --> Menu --> System Settings --> Info.

I have just been on the telephone to my father going through
the steps to check the version on his Stream83i, which in
fact was still the original version and had not auto-updated,
and then did a manual update to the latest of November 24th, 2012

ir-mmi-FS2026-0200-0048_STR83iau_V2.2.14.EX15384-V1.10

<http://www.robertsradio.co.UK/assets/Stream83isoftwareupdate.pdf>

This actually took several attempts before it succeeded.

Remember when doing a firmware update to never do it when
there is a probability of the power going off and only
with rock solid WiFi or preferably ethernet cable connection.

[Brian Gregory [UK]]

"Richard Evans" <rp.evan...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:jh866t$tvu$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
> ... can't break the WEP2 Encryption ...

Don't forget to turn off WPS now that it's cracked wide open and provides a
way to grab your WPA2 key in a few hours.
http://code.google.com/p/reaver-wps/
http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-335.pdf
http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-337.pdf

--

Brian Gregory. (In the UK)
n...@bgdsv.co.uk
To email me remove the letter vee.

[Scott]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 20:09:21 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>
wrote:

>On Monday, February 13th, 2012, at 19:52:31h +0000, Scott wrote:
>
>> It was worth paying a small premium
>> for 'instant gratification'.
>
>Well there is always that price to pay, and in this
>case GBP 10 is not excessive, especially if, there
>are problems you can easily return the unit to the store
>rather than all the hassle of parcel pickup.
>
>> Thank you once again Mr Miller for your assistance.
>
>You are most welcome.
>
>Now you need to get busy on your PC setting up a uPnP
>server (if you have not already done so) and getting
>your music and downloaded podcasts accessible ;)

Unfortunately this may be a challenge as the instructions say Windows
Media Player is only able to serve MP3 and WMA files. My music is in
AAC file format. It seems I will have to find another UPnP server
application.

>
>Incidentally, how is the DAB reception -- I would expect
>national, regional and the Glasgow (11C) multiplexes are solid,
>but can you see any flicker on the meter for adjacent
>Ayr local multiplex (11B)?

You are spot on. BBC Radio 4 for example is showing errors between 0
and 1. 11B shows either no bars or two bars in the display and West
Sound is unlistenable.

>
>And here is another question -- what is the firmware
>version on the radio --> Menu --> System Settings --> Info.

ir-mmi-FS2026-0200-0048_STR83iau_V2.2.14.EX15384-V1.10

>
>I have just been on the telephone to my father going through
>the steps to check the version on his Stream83i, which in
>fact was still the original version and had not auto-updated,
>and then did a manual update to the latest of November 24th, 2012
>
> ir-mmi-FS2026-0200-0048_STR83iau_V2.2.14.EX15384-V1.10

Seems to be the same.

>
><http://www.robertsradio.co.UK/assets/Stream83isoftwareupdate.pdf>
>
>This actually took several attempts before it succeeded.
>
>Remember when doing a firmware update to never do it when
>there is a probability of the power going off and only
>with rock solid WiFi or preferably ethernet cable connection.

Good point. I did mine via WiFi before reading your message, but got
away with it.

[J G Miller]

On Tuesday, February 14th, 2012, at 21:24:14h +0000, Scott wrote:

> My music is in AAC file format. It seems I will have to find another
> UPnP server application.

The good news is that the Stream 83i does support AAC.

Probably the best uPnP server, Mediatomb, also supports serving AAC,
but for that you need either MAC OS X, GNU/Linux, or BSD.

Ever considered running a GNU/Linux server? ;)
(And remember this could be something like a Atom based nettop
eg Foxconn, Zotac which uses very little power for 24h operation.)

Otherwise you may have to consider buying Twonky media server
for Windoze which I think supports AAC format files, or perhaps
take a look at the table at

<http://en.wikipedia.ORG/wiki/Comparison_of_UPnP_AV_media_servers>

> 11B shows either no bars or two bars in the display and West
> Sound is unlistenable.

Have you tried moving the radio around to a preferably westerly
facing window position?

> I did mine via WiFi before reading your message, but got
> away with it.

Oh well it shows that your WiFi connection is reliable enough.

[Scott]

On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:46:20 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, February 14th, 2012, at 21:24:14h +0000, Scott wrote:
>
>> My music is in AAC file format. It seems I will have to find another
>> UPnP server application.
>
>The good news is that the Stream 83i does support AAC.
>
>Probably the best uPnP server, Mediatomb, also supports serving AAC,
>but for that you need either MAC OS X, GNU/Linux, or BSD.
>
>Ever considered running a GNU/Linux server? ;)
>(And remember this could be something like a Atom based nettop
> eg Foxconn, Zotac which uses very little power for 24h operation.)
>
>Otherwise you may have to consider buying Twonky media server
>for Windoze which I think supports AAC format files, or perhaps
>take a look at the table at
>
><http://en.wikipedia.ORG/wiki/Comparison_of_UPnP_AV_media_servers>

This sounds a bit complicated but I will investigate another day!

>
>> 11B shows either no bars or two bars in the display and West
>> Sound is unlistenable.
>
>Have you tried moving the radio around to a preferably westerly
>facing window position?

No. If I wanted to listen to West Sound I would do so via Internet
radio :-)

>
>> I did mine via WiFi before reading your message, but got
>> away with it.
>
>Oh well it shows that your WiFi connection is reliable enough.

It usually is. I think it was my former Internet radio that was
unreliable.

Thanks again for your assistance. It was on your advice I bought the
Stream 83i.