[sf-lug] thanks for the help : need help with wifi access

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Jim Stockford (jim at well.com):

> I should have written "doohickey" rather than "gizmo".
> It was a hardware thing that's got Linksys written on it.
> It is a router plus a four-port switch plus antennae for
> a wifi access point, along with a dhcp server and other
> software. I do not know the correct name for these
> things. By "died" I mean is no longer electrically or
> otherwise functional.

OK, are you basically now saying that what 'died' was your _WAP_ (your
wireless access point)?   In other words, an external, separately
powered piece of electronics that's not a component of your laptop in
any way?  If so, your initial problem description was not only confusing
but also deeply misleading.  Seriously, consider starting over.  Take it
from the top and say what your problem is, describing the specific
symptom and what has occurred and what resulted from your doing things,
in chronological order.

Reading further down, where you say what 'died' was a Linksys model
EA6900, we find that, indeed, you were referring to your WAP -- and the
natural inference that you were talking about some component of your
laptop is false.
https://www.linksys.com/us/p/P-EA6900/

> I'm saying that not only did my doohickey die, but my laptop's
> ability to use wi-fi ceased, if not deceased. I'm guessing that
> the death of the doohickey somehow created damage to my
> laptop's networking software. The IP address for my laptop
> changed from 192.168.1.something to 169.?.?.?

One, no, your WAP dying is not going to create any sort of damage to
your laptop's hardware or software.

Two, you are still not bothering to provide raw data about your
situtation, as witness your saying '169.?.?.?'.  What this tells me is
that you are still winging it, attempting to detail the facts from
memory instead of producing them in real time so you can transcribe
them accurately.

Three, an interface ending up with a 169.0.0.0 IP address merely means
that it requested a DHCP address (broadcast a DHCPDISCOVER message), but
received no DHCP lease in response.  It means you are attempting DHCP
client mode on that interface but didn't get a DHCP address.

Four, you _know_ there is nothing wrong with your laptop's wireless
adapter, for the reasons Bobbie posted separately.


> >Is the new one perhaps an Intel Wireless-AC model 9260-series
> >wireless/Bluetooth card in M.2 2230 physical format, one like this (as
> >suggested by your dmesg output)?
> >https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Wireless-Ac-9260-2230-Gigabit/dp/B079QJQF4Y
> >My point is, you haven't even told us what the wireless hardware in
> >question _is_ (make and model), let alone why it should be surprising to
> >have a lack of functionality if something 'died'.
>
> I hope that's cleared up.

Well, you just ignored the question (several lines above this one).

Fortunately, I'm pretty certain that your wireless network adapter is an
Intel Wireless-AC model 9260-series M.2 2230 card.  It would have been
nice to have you confirm that, but I think I've read the few entrails
you've provided accurately enough, despite the confusing wild goose
chase about 'dead' wireless hardware that turns out to be completely
separate from your laptop.  But lack of clarity on that wasted a good
bit of time on several people's part.

> JS: the symptoms are that my laptop does not show any wifi access
> points, none at all, and that using Settings and choosing "Wi-Fi" the
> information panel shows "No Wi-Fi Adaptor <CR> Make sure you have a
> Wi-Fi adapter plugged and turned on" The physical wifi components are
> built-in, probably on the motherboard. This is a ZaReason re-branded
> laptop that ZaReason labels it Ultralap 6440 i5"

One, you haven't established that there are WAPs to find.  So, for
example, you have a replacement WAP to replace the one that 'died', but
have you verified that it's fully usable by wifi client machines?
You've cross-checked that machines -do- connect and get DHCP leases?
If not, then it's not clear that even if your laptop has no problems
that it ought to do likewise.

Two, you keep talking about 'Settings' as if everyone had exactly the
same Desktop Environment you do, such that everyone would automatically
know what you're talking about.  As I said before, I am _guessing_ you
are talking about some GNOME Desktop Environment networking app.  You
could have clarified, but didn't, and instead you're just repeating the
same vague thing.

Three, now that you _finally_ at least identified your laptop as a
ZeReason UltraLap 6440 i5, one can check their Web site and verify that,
indeed, my guess is correct and you ave an Intel
Wireless-AC model 9260-series card in the laptop's M.2 socket.



> # iwconfig
> lo        no wireless extensions.
> 
> enp58s0f1  no wireless extensions.
> 
> wlp59s0   IEEE 802.11  ESSID:off/any
>           Mode:Managed  Access Point: Not-Associated Tx-Power=off
>           Retry short limit:7   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off
>           Encryption key:off
>           Power Management:on

OK, so, there you see your wireless interface listed with device name
wlp59s0.  iwconfig appears to see nothing wrong with it.  The
description is of a network interface that is ready for action, but not
associated with any WAP at the moment.

Maybe you just haven't yet set up your new WAP.  I wouldn't know.


> >Just running through marginally relevant suggestions you find on
> >https://ubuntuforums.org/ is a poor substitute for diagnosis and
> >testing.
>
> I don't know what to do. I'm guessing trying things
> in some sequence.

Please consider _not_ just 'trying things in some sequence'.   When users
take that approach, they usually just stumble around introducing new
variables into the diagnostic situation, which is the opposite of
progress.  I keep pleading with people on this mailing list to cease
this 'Well, I threw at the problem a bunch of random suggestions from
ubuntuforums.org and read some tea leaves, but nothing worked' approach,
and I'm not sure anyone is yet listening.

You really should only do things after making sure you know why you are
doing them, and what they will do.  Seriously.


> >What wouldn't hurt is removing and then reloading the iwlwifi module:
> >
> >$ sudo modprobe -r iwlwifi
> >$ sudo modprobe iwlwifi
> >
> >JS: DONE. Need to reboot?

Abso-frigging-lutely _no_.

This is not Microsoft Windows.


> Results were to turn Airplane Mode on. I turned it off.

Here, I'll say it again:  Please concentrate on giving raw information.
The above is an interpretation on your part, not the raw details.


Jim, we've now gone a few rounds, and had to do a lot of guessing,
because your problem description was vague, which means getting to the
facts has been a bit like pulling teeth, even aside from the irrelevant
and confusing red herring about the 'dead' wifi hardware.  I'm a bit
worn out, and I should probably move on to other things.

In an ideal world, we would have had a coherent account, in
chronological order, of what happened, which would help with the vital
question of what if anything _changed_.  E.g., if (as seemed the case
initially) you had had occasion to change the wireless adapter in your
laptop, then I would have advised you to take steps including going into
the motherboard BIOS Setup and making sure that the wireless
functionality is hardware-enabled there, and that Secure Boot is still
switched off.  However, unfortunately we have had nothing like such an
account from you.

That is part of why I suggested that you start over again, from the top.
Which advice I notice you've elected to ignore.  Well, good luck.