802.11b built in

Well here's a thought that struck me as I was sitting around listening to music on my RR...

It would be really nice if a version was offered with built-in 802.11b wireless. Right now I've got my receiver connected this way, but I've got an ugly WAP sitting on top of the receiver with the additional cable and antennas detracting from the "beauty" of the receiver.

I realize that there would be an additional cost associated with adding this to the hardware, but it seems like it would add to the usefulness of the receiver. Just find an open outlet where you want the receiver, power it on, and listen to music. No need to throw Cat5 around or find an HPNA outlet...

Or then again maybe I'm the only one crazy(lazy?) enough to do this?

~fiddy

Yes that would be useful.

Rob

Yes that would be useful.

So much potential hidden meaning in so few words...

Ethernet Converter is much neater

See attached pics.

Oh dear, perhaps my attachment was over the 100000 bytes . .

ummm.. maybe I missed something... what does the Ethernet Converter convert to/from? Is it wireless?

The box on top of my Receiver in the pictures is the Ethernet converter, it needs power ( 5v ) and an ethernet patch cable to the Receiver. You put a PCMCIA 802.11b wireless card in it, and then your Receiver becomes Wireless. I also use one in the car with my Empeg. Works just fine.

Downside is ~£250 for the Ethernet Converter, plus ~£80 for 802.11b card.

Downside is ~£250 for the Ethernet Converter, plus ~£80 for 802.11b card

A Netgear AP with the right firmware to make it work as a client is a third of the price.

Whist I agree its much cheaper, I challenge you to get one behind the dashboard of my Lotus, and also to get a girlfriend to have one in the living room on display

By the looks of it the Netgear AP is no bigger that your Ethernet adapter and it is just as attractive, I'll post a picture later...

Would be very interested in a picture and if you have a ruler handy, could you measure it, as I am about to buy a couple more ethernet converters.

Also what are the power requirements.

Thanks.

From http://www.netgear.com/product_view.asp?xrp=11&yrp=30&zrp=92

Dimensions L: 163 mm (6.4 in)
W: 143 mm (5.6 in)
H: 27 mm (1.1 in)

I'll photo a picture of it sitting my my stereo stack when I get home. As to power requirements, it comes with it's own external power supply, which supplies 5V at 1A.

That looks very neat, just checking prices now .

What firmware do you flash it with to make it think its a client ?

My issue isn't so much the size/looks of having the converter (I've got a clashing LInksys WAP11) as much as the additional power cable and ethernet cable that could be eliminated if the wireless was built in. Plus if its built in, there's nothing to worry about getting the girlfriend to approve of...

(By the way, the linksys WAP11 I'm using is roughly the same cost as the netgear AP that Andy mentioned...)

As you can see from the pictures, no cables on view, there is just a short patch cable from the Receiver to the Converter.

Here it is, sitting on top of my Receiver:




P.S. I suspect my wife would like me to point out that the wallpaper is not our choice (haven't redecorated since moving into the house) and I would like to point out that the amp is not my amp of choice, my Mission died recently and this Technics was the only other amp I had available. Must go hifi shopping...

In the UK at least the Linksys is quite a bit more expensive. I got my Netgear for 104 quid + VAT, the cheapest I have seen the Linksys for is 160 quid. So the Netgear is a steal, especially considering they are identical hardware...

The latest Netgear firmware is available here:

http://www.expressresponse.com/cgi-bin/progsnp/netgear1/srchjnnp?search_type=vdocument&search_input=D100173.htm

However as the Linksys WAP11 and Netgear ME102 are identical hardware you can actually upgrade it with the latest WAP11 firmware, which is helpful because Linksys seem to be quicker to add new features.

The ME102 is the same hardware? Hmmm interesting... especially since I read that the WAP11 is the same as one of the SMC models (2655W?). Are any of the small home wireless access points built using different parts? It's a conspiracy I tell ya

(I'd add pics of my setup as well, but things are packed away for my move this weekend)

Thnaks Andy, looks a very neat solution, and ofcourse cheaper. Will take a tape measure to mine tonight as I think it could be almost 2/3's of the size of that though. So I could get a couple of the Netgear ones for the house, and transfer the Converter into my car.

That looks great. I am, however, interested in something similar with more ports because I would also like to connect my Tivo along with Rio Receiver to a wireless access point. I could use a hub with this Netgear ME102, but it would seem that a cleaner solution would be a wireless AP with a built-in hub like the Netgear MR314. Unfortunately this device appears to be a bit larger than the ME102, but will have to do.

Do you know if this device can also "act as a client" like the ME102? Do you know if these devices use the same or similar firmware? Thanks.

A MR314 is much, much bigger than the ME102. You could sit a tiny 4 port Netgear hub like the EN104TP on top of the ME102 and it would still be smaller than the MR314.

I doubt very much whether the firmwares are similar, the MR314 is a much more complex device, being a router and NAT box rather than just a bridge.

If the ME 102 is a bridge does that mean that it just repeats the wired ethernet traffic on the wireless LAN? Does it deal with anything at the IP level?

What I'm getting at is if the ME 102 doesn't do NAT, can I even use a hub behind it and have the ability to have several computers on the wired leg able to talk with the wireless leg?

Unlike some of the other guys on this thread, I'm not overly concerned with the size of the device. I just want something to hook up multiple wired ethernet devices (Rio Receiver, Playstation 2, Tivo, etc.) and then go wireless from there and I don't want to have to buy one ME102 for each. So I'm cool with having a whole wired subnet behind the MR314 and having it do NAT through to the wireless LAN as long as the net booting of the Rio Receiver will work fine crossing networks. If it doesn't, then hopefully a hub behind the ME102 will work.

Thanks for any help you can provide.

It doesn't do anything at the IP level, it just bridges the two networks together. So yes, everything on the wired network will be able to see everything on the wireless network quite happily. You can just plug a hub into the ME102 and away you go.

Thanks Andy, that sounds like the better way to go as it seems that the Rio Receiver tries broadcasting to find it's network boot host, and I don't think that's going to work well across networks.

I have just one more question (I think). Does the ME102 do Ad-Hoc mode? That is how my current wireless network (all Orinoco at this point) is configured and would be easiest for me. Thanks.

It can, even with the firmware it ships with. With the latest firmware it can also operate in client mode and talk to another AP as a client, although I have never tried this.

Thanks andy for all your help. I am surprised how little techincal information was available for this item, even on Netgear's own page.

You might not be able to help me with this, but I will ask anyway...

I now have my ME102 and Rio Receiver. I am having trouble getting the ME102 to work as a wireless bridge with my Orinoco/Linux based network. If you have any pointers or hints, they would be appreciated. Here is the setup:

My router, DHCP server and MP3 file server machine is a Linux box with an Orinoco silver wireless card in it. I setup my ME102 to be a wireless bridge (using the latest firmware upgrade that netgear has, 1.4H3) and gave it the AP MAC address of the Linux router/server and told it to get an IP via DHCP. It is actually able to get an IP address from the router/DHCP server everytime it power cycled. But then I never see any more traffic from the ME102.

I put my rio on the wired-ethernet end (via a hub and directly with a crossover) and its traffic never shows up on the wireless end. If I try to ping the address that the ME102 got via DHCP, it doesn't answer. I am currently using Ad-hoc mode with 64(40)-bit WEP. I ran a network sniffer on the wireless end and the only data I ever see from the ME102 is the DHCP traffic.

Do you have a similar setup? If so what types of hardware do you have running your wireless network? I am wondering if this is some sort of incompatibility with the orinoco drivers and the ME102 maybe due to Ad-hoc mode and/or WEP. I'm currently searching google for similar setups and help, but haven't found anything yet.

Thanks for any help you might be able to provide.

Hmm, you're right I'm not sure if I can help, I'll give it a go though...

First thing I would do is turn off WEP, I did this until I was happy everything else was working so that I could remove one of the variables.

Secondly, you say in one part of your post that you are running in AdHoc mode and elsewhere that you have the ME102 setup as a wireless bridge. I don't understand this, I thought the two modes were mutually exclusive. I thought the bridge mode required both devices to be in bridge mode.

Are the Linux box and the ME102 the only two wireless devices that you have ? If they are I would just setup the ME102 as a normal AP and use the Linux box as a normal client. This is what I currently do on my network as I only have my ME102 and a PCI card in one of my servers.

If you have other devices then I would try setting the ME102 as an AdHoc client, which I understand you can do with the latest firmware (or the WAP11 firmware which also works on the ME102 and is more advanced).

I'm afraid I'm a relative wireless newbie, so I don't know if this will help at all...

Thanks andy.

I think I am going to try to set up the ME102 as the AP, even though my Linux box is actually the gateway. This is sort of inefficient as I have several other machines on the wireless leg and their traffic will now have to go through the ME102 on its way to the Linux router, but I can deal with this if it will allow the ME102 to talk to my wireless network.

I didn't see anything in the USB configurator to specifically set it to an Ad-hoc client. I don't have the software in front of me, but I remember the settings being Access Point, Access Point Client, and Wireless Bridge. I don't know that Wireless bridging and Ad-hoc are mutually exclusive, but that might be the case. If it is, that is most likely the source of my problems. I can try downloading the latest firmware/software configurator for the Linksys WAP11 and see if it has an Ad-hoc mode setting, but I think I will save that one for last. We'll see how it goes.

OK, got it working. The ME 102 is the new access point in the house; no more Ad-hoc mode. I had some really weird bandwidth/connection problems when I first set it up, but then changed the Preamble setting in the ME102 to Long Preamble and then everything was smooth after that. I guess my Orinoco cards don't deal well with Short Preamble.

Hi. I'm using the NG ME102 as a WAP at the Server end and an ME101 which is a purpose built ethernet/802.11b bridge at the Rio end (£60 online in UK), works just fine and the ME101 is quite small compared to the 102 (£80 online in the UK)

I got one of these: http://www.overstock.com/se/Mitsumi_Wavit11_Wireless_80211b_Access_Point.html it's a great unit, small, and cheap. It does everything, ad hoc, bridge, access point, etc.

They are currently out of stock, but they can be found elsewhere such as Ebay.