Range of BEFW11S4 version 1 vs. version 4

Dunno. The chipsets are radically difference. Punch in the FCCID numbers into the FCCID web site and see what's inside:

formatting link
version: |
formatting link
'PKW-BEFW11S4V4'I couldn't find the V1 version.

I vaguely recall reading one complaint in this newsgroup about a version 1 unit that just quit for no obvious reason.

I have a BEFW11S4v4. $5 is a great price. Try running the router exploits test at:

formatting link
hangs on 2 of the tests. I forgot which ones.

I suggest you lose the power booster. The problem is that you've built an alligator. That's an access point with a big mouth and small ears. The whole neighborhood will hear your transmit signal, while your receiver remains essentially unchanged and cannot hear low power client radios at the same distances. If you're going to use a power amp, you really should have equal power output at both ends of a link to insure symmetrical ranges. Otherwise, your power boosted signal is just another source of interference.

Also, going through 3 walls is somewhat of a crap shoot. You will probably get a connection, but it probably won't stay reliably connected. Perhaps you would be better off with a 2nd access point at the other end of the house (with a CAT5 cable in between).

Reply to
Jeff Liebermann
Loading thread data ...

Anyone know if there is any range difference between the original version 1 of BEFW11S4 and the final version, version 4?

MY 4+ year old version 1 with power booster had become increasingly unreliable, requiring resetting multiple times a day due to dropped connections. Just got a replacement, a version 4. Why not a G model, you might ask? The replacement was $4.99 so the price was right. Also I have the power output booster if necessary.

Initially set it up with out the old power booster and it seems to provide similar readings on my wife's laptop two rooms and 3 walls away.

Bob

Reply to
Bob Alston

Wait a minute, you mean to tell me that I could have gotten a replacement for the 11S4 v1 router that I tossed in the trash?

Duane :)

Reply to
Duane ;-)

There's no fix. The way a (SOCKS) proxy server works is that it regenerates the connection. That makes everything on the internet side appear as if it's coming from the proxy server instead of from your home router. Same with web accelerator cache servers and anonymizers.

formatting link
problem is similar to what happens if you install 2 or more NAT routers in series. The test server on the internet will only see the last router. Incidentally, this is common with WISP (wireless ISP) service where the ISP doesn't want to deliver routeable IP's to the clients and uses RFC-1918 non-routeable IP's instead. Running the test only tests the ISP's firewall, not the clients.

Incidentally, one the early online web accelerator cache services and ran into a problem. When one of their customers abused some other system, and ended up on a blacklist, the IP address listed on the blacklist was that of the web accelerator proxy server, and not that of the customer. Suddenly, everyone using the system found themselves banned from that system.

Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

Whoever wrote these tests has some problems with correctly identifying IPs. They're using http which is famous for being a poor method, as it won't work if your ISP uses a web proxy or cache.

Mine can't even be tested, due to the above flaw in the design of the tests.

Reply to
Mark McIntyre

Naw, I never make mistakes (that I can't cover up).

Well, the usual method is using the CGI environment variables on the web server to disclose the IP address the client. I scribbled some scripts 10 years ago to do this while I was engaged in a heroic and futile effort to learn web design and programming:

formatting link
Y'er right that internet web caches and proxy accelerators are usually limited to port 80. However, proxy servers come in all shapes and configurations which are normally configured for a set of "allowed" ports. These are common in a corporate environment. I've configured a few of these and have to install a configuration record for every possible outgoing port number that is allowed.

I can see how one could obtain the IP at the user end using an ActiveX control or some program that spys on the local system and returns the necessary information. I wasn't aware that it could be done from a simple internet web server. Is there some trick I'm missing? Do you know a web page that does report the IP address of a client behind a proxy server that I can try (and disect)? I'm curious to see how it's done. This became an issue many years ago when some of the cable companies were sniffing traffic trying to determine how many client computahs were hidden behind an NAT firewall or proxy server so they could charge for the "extra" clients.

Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

You're incorrect. Many sites can correctly identify my IP, by not using http packets as the detection protocol. What you're missing is that web caching / proxying is generally limited to only the web ports.

Reply to
Mark McIntyre

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.