Chuck said:
Terminology is always a problem. I don't know that there is a defined term for
the program in question. But it is a Client, because it contacts the Access
Point. Just as a Windows Networking Client contacts a file server or domain
controller.
<
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=wifi+client&qt_s=Search>
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=wifi+client&qt_s=Search
The term 'windows networking client' is marketting speak. If it is
acting as a client then it's on a network.
As you prob know though(I write this next sentence for others that may
not know). If it's on a network it doesn't make it a client, it may act
as a client at times though or even as a server.
Connecting - in the case of wireless - may involve acting as a client
for authentication (I don't know much about wireless). But this not
the main part of connecting. Connecting is about he medium. It's the
physical layer. Waves or Cables.
I think that clients and servers are only at the application layer.
A device is a client when it uses whatever client protocol.
A computer communicating with a server, is a client - in doing that.
So, as you say, if it's contacting a file server or domain controller.
But *********an access point is not a server*********. Or if it is,
then it's not largely a server. The main function of an access point is
as a wireless switch.
That has nothing to do with servers any more than connecting a
computer to a switch using a cable would be connecting to a server.
Since an access point is not a server. It doesn't take an 'access point
client' to connect to it.
Now some Clients run as distinct .exes, others don't. I'm looking at my laptop,
and it shows two WiFi Client processes:
iFrmewrk.exe "Intel PROSet/Wireless"
explorer.exe "Wireless Network Connection Status"
Everything runs an .exe somewhere. And the .exe, whatever you want to call it
(try "supplicant" if you wish) helps you select an Access Point, then
authenticate to that Access Point. WZC runs as part of one instance of
svchost.exe, and uses explorer.exe as the front end.
With Windows, WAC / WZC is bundled into a service (one of the reasons why folks
prefer WAC, that it is running when you are logging in, letting you use WiFi to
authenticate into a domain). The Intel ProSet process does not run as a
service, it's just a process that autostarts when you login.
so it's not really a program one would start and close,. Infact, if
those 2 EXEs make it up, and you close explorer.exe, the windows GUI
would kind of restart. And I don't think MS wrote iFrmewrk.exe with the
intention of anybody opening and closing it.
It's an integral part of windows. It's not a program within windows,
like paintbrush.
You can delete paintbrush. You can't really delete the wireless
networking part of windows. If you can it'd be a crazy hack that'd
probably cause more problems.
Which brings us back to the actual discussion. Are you now clear that the
computer itself is issuing the 169.254.n.n address, after it's unable to get an
Internet capable address from the AP?
<
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=220874>
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=220874
--
i'm not the original poster.
Now, I know some reading this (not you Chuck) , but, people that aren't
familiar with workings/behaviour of people on many other computer
newsgroups, may think i'm being a pedantic timewaster. Not so. And
there are many like me, better versions.
My philosophy is of usenet as a group learning forum, where all
participants can increase their knowledge. Putting all our minds
together. Sorting fact from fiction. Improving our collective
knowledge. Sharing knowledge.
When a person asks a question he asks it
FIRST) for the group
2nd) for himself
It is archived so it is not wasted.
That, I believe, is a reason why many Techies , types usually on unix
newsgroups, will REFUSE to respond to private email. And get EXTREMELY
ANGRY. if anybody dares make the selfish suggestion. (I am getting mad
at the thought. i'm not saying it happened here in this thread or
recently. I may assume it hasn't)
No doubt participants here are familiar with that philosophy. It is
this same philosophy that is behind my post.
That usenet is not SOLELY about answering a single individual.
I am not referring these words to Chuck 'cos he knows this. But to
those that are either too selfish or too immature or just for some
reason, unenlightened enough not to know. Chuck's only mistake was to
assume that I was the original poster. A *dangerous* assumption since
it encourages people to break with the usenet philosophy described
herein. Furthermore, it also shows how low the culture has fallen.
I am new to networks, I may make many mistakes in this email. I do not
pontificate over others. If I make any errors here, I'd be glad if
anybody with greater knowledge BUTTS IN and corrects them - for the
benefit of the group.
Chuck, I recognise that you know an enormous amount about windows
networking. Far more than I. But, you have made some mistakes here ,
however, those mistakes are not in your use of windows.
I am not an expert on networks, or an expert on networking in windows.
I know a little bit about networks and next to nothing about networking
in windows. But, in that previous post, I did consult a friend that
knows more than me, and he agreed with me. Your use of the term client
is wrong.
And I think your use of the term program, is not what most people would
consider a program.
Terminology and Concepts are EXTREMELY important to some.
I know your main goal is helping people. But as you know, it's also
important to help ALL TECHIES interested in improoving their
understanding of terminology and concepts , to gain a greater
understanding of the machine. That goal, is a lofty goal, high and
above all of us, like a great eagle in the sky.
