I knew the 169.x.x.x address had been assigned to computers when an IP
address is not available but did not know it was in relation to DHCP. I
thought MS had a range assigned to them for just this reason. I wanted to
make sure my router was not refusing the connection because of IP issues. All
my systems have static IP addresses because when I was using DHCP someone
connected to my network. I use the 192.168.x.x reserved range for my home
network. Thanks for the clarification on that.
As far as SANS goes I worked in a SOC for 4 years and we used their training
material, website, and books for our resources. Several of our people were
able to complete gold certification with SANS. This is no small undertaking!!
I have a book written by one of their people on securing wireless networks
and it is what I used to secure, as much as possible, my network. That same
book is the reason I waited so long to go wireless. Since a disgruntled RSA
employee released the WEP code to the Internet community way back when I did
not want to use that as an encryption method. Once they released WPA and WPA2
I bought a router that supported it. As we say in the security community,
"Windows security is like running naked through your neighborhood." :0 )
I'm sure that Vista will have its issues just like XP did and 2000 before
it. I don't usually purchase an OS until the second release due to this very
issue. Being a security person myself I like a lot of the built in security
features. What I don't like is they have to move everything around and change
the name of things. Like Add/Remove Programs is now called something else. It
took me a while to find it in control panel. And the way they have the
networking features scattered all over the place. I'm sure once I get use to
it I'll like it just like I enjoy XP as far as Windows goes. I personally
prefer MAC/Linux, but XP is good for now.
Yes Vista is a resource hog that is for sure. Thankfully Best Buy had RAM on
sale and I upgraded the laptop to 2GB. You would thing this laptop would
scream but it doesn't. It is fast but not as fast as my XP machine with 2GB.
:0 )
The strange thing about this whole blog is that I had to drop my security
completely from the router. Once down, Vista connected easily to my network.
Once I enabled security again the connection dropped. I went to Start>Help &
Support and when I clicked the link the Internet came back up. I rebooted the
laptop to see if it would stay up and it did not. I went back to Start>Help &
Support and this time the Internet did not come back up. I clicked on a link
with in this window and the Internet came back up. I rebooted the computer
several times and the laptop connects to my network. Now that it is working
my daughter won't let me play with it any more. How funny is that!!!! I have
been playing with this thing since Christmas and finally it is working. <He
says with his fingers crossed> Maybe the hot fix took a couple days to work
through the system? At list point your guess is as good as mine. Anyway I
would like to thank you both for your help in this matter. It is nice to have
people to bounce ideas off of to resolve issues.
Sincerely,
Desperate Dad.
)
Chuck said:
SANS is an authoritative source. They are the source for most material on
hackering and exploits. Either way my network functions well without the SSID
being broadcast to the world. If you have ANY encryption enabled Vista just
will not connect. This is the exact reason I did not want to go to Vista
right a way. Too many bugs in the first releases.
Tonight when I get home I will try all the different encrytion options to
see if Vista favors one over the other and give you a better report. Do you
know anything about the 169.x.x.x IP address that I meantion earlier? I'll
try to find that place in Vista where I found this information and pass that
along as well.
Thanks for the suggestions though.
The "169.254.x.x" address is APIPA - it's what your computer self assigns when
it can't get DHCP service. It lets your computer communicate with other
computers on the 169.254/16 subnet.
<
http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/07/limited-or-no-connectivity.html>
http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/07/limited-or-no-connectivity.html
SANS is an authoritative source, and one of the best. I've seen that subject
discussed both ways - both in SANS and elsewhere. Can you provide a link to the
SANS article that you read? Here's what I have so far, which might interest
you.
<
http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/disabling-ssid.html>
http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/disabling-ssid.html
And plenty of people use Vista with encrypted WiFi. Enough people have problems
with Vista in general, and post here, and make people think that Vista is a
major disaster like Windows ME. The people who are happily using their Vista
equipped computers aren't posting here, and that's a part of the perceived
problem. I personally had no problem with it, excepting that it required a lot
more resources than Windows XP, and made my laptop, originally packaged with
Windows XP, crawl.
--
Cheers,
Chuck, MS-MVP 2005-2007 [Windows - Networking]
http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/
Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience.
My email is AT DOT
actual address pchuck mvps org.
