WiFi restoration

[Tim]

Doug:
>> You should be able to access the device over the network in wifi mode
>> simply by entering the ip address in the address line of your router.
> 
Timothy Murphy:
> I get the web-page of my router when I do that.

Depending on how your wireless extender works, it could just act like a
switch, passing things through.  Or, it could act like a router.  You
really need to check its manual.

It can even be that some devices configuration control aren't on the
standard HTTP port 80, so you browse to another port to configure them.


> I'm not clear if the repeater has an IP address once it is working.
> If it does, it is not mentioned in "arp -a" or in /var/log/messages .

If you have a DHCP server on your LAN, monitoring it for changes can
show addresses of things being attached to your LAN.

I have a wireless access point that can be operated in two modes, either
as an access point that's similar to a switch, or as a router using NAT.
It does have an ethernet address in both modes, but behaves peculiarly
in access point mode, all the ethernet ports seem to have the same MAC.

Some devices are just damn peculiar, and you really do need to read
their manual.

> I have read it, several times.
> It does not mention that you must change your ethernet IP address
> to 192.168.10.n.

I really do hate devices that insist you change your network to suit
itself.  More so, when they use an unusually different one.

> Its first suggestion, to use WPS, did not work in my case,
> possibly because my router's version of WPS, SecureEasySetup,
> is incompatible with the repeater's WPS.

I was under the impression that all devices using WPS were supposed to
be compatible.  I'm also under the impression that it's a security risk,
in itself.
> 

-- 
tim at localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp

Linux 3.19.5-100.fc20.i686 #1 SMP Mon Apr 20 20:28:39 UTC 2015 i686

All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is no point trying
to privately email me, I will only read messages posted to the public lists.

George Orwell's '1984' was supposed to be a warning against tyranny, not
a set of instructions for supposedly democratic governments.