OT: Windows 7 seems to have recently killed my ethernet link

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, May 3, 2020 at 10:34:50 PM UTC+10, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:38523991-f4a2-497d-b614-79a1bf5f0edf@googlegroups.com:

On Sunday, May 3, 2020 at 1:45:34 PM UTC+10,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:7f362070-b94a-41f6-b8e6-6d4044c0285d@googlegroups.com:

Because we are stuck with using the WiFi link to access the
internet, and we can see up to a dozen other WiFi links from
adjacent flats (at the right time of day) and they all
interfere with our WiFi link.


Ummm... No, they do not. That is the point. They have their
channels and you have yours. IF your wifi device is not
configured to access your bb modem's wifi router correctly, you
will have problems, because being the closest one to you, it
should be the one you have the easiest time finding on a power
sorted list, which they all are. Like right at the top of the
list.

Of course it is. But all the WiFi links are transmitting power on
much the same frequencies,

You STILL obviously do not know how it works.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi

and this acts as background noise on
our particular link.

Making stupid shit up too, I see.

Read the bit in the Wikipedia article about "interference".

The signal to noise ratio gets degraded, and
the error rate goes up.

Bullshit.

If you knew even a tiny bit more, you wouldn't have embarrassed yourself by making that claim.

Once your link is established, and it being at the top
of the signal strength list, will NEVER have packet losses due to s-n
issues. You are grasping at old straws about a realm you never fully
understood.

IOW, you lie.

Actually you don't understand enough about how WiFi works to
appreciate what I was saying. That doesn't make me a liar.

Actually YOU do not understand wifi AT all, and the 'things you
were saying' were bullshit as I stated once already.

The problem is your ignornace, not mine.

And ALL BB Modems use wifi levels that are secure so don't even
go there either. And most have 5GHz channels too.

<snip>

College folks have no problems with
phones, PCs game consoles, IOT devices... All have no problems
hooking up multiple devices where there are literally hundreds
"in adjacent flats".

That isn't the problem. The problem is the performance of each
link in a dirty RF environment.

Except it isn't 'dirty'. You could, in fact, if you knew the
access, get good links on the weaker 'links' in the list. You would
rather use Trump logic and come up with bullshit reasons why your
cheap shit fails. Here's one for ya... Windows 7.

Yeah... They are NO LONGER doing ANY updates, even virus updates,
on Windows 7. That was announced. You missed it.

I know it - they kept on telling me to upgrade to Windows 10 for ages.

I've chosen not to.

You using Windows 7 on an internet connected computer is one proof
you are clueless as they have been deemed as high vulnerability to
attack for a couple years now.

The machine (and the laptop) has Norton 360 running for protection against virus attacks - I've been putting their protection software on my machines for about twenty years now, and it does seem to work.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, May 3, 2020 at 10:20:12 PM UTC+10, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:4994e648-1973-4354-961e-4b42000f3001@googlegroups.com:

She was complaining about the way her computer was slow to start
on Thursday mornings, just as mine was.

Just Thursdays? And you conclude that is a Microsoft problem?
Bent logic.

The whole sequence was that you'd start your computer, and rather than staring up it would go into a "downloading Windows up-dates" routine, then turn itself off and restart.

The IT guys aren't going
micromanage to that extent.

It is not about micro-management. If it is a company owned machine
THEY control the OS on it AND the update level of the OS as companies
like to prove efficacy on an update before releasing it company
campus wide.

That isn't what my wife's employers did. Her computer got Microsoft up-dates just as mine did.

Companies rarely set up their machines to be "auto-updated".
Never, in fact if they have 'an IT guy'.

This must be an exception.

So, if they 'manage' the Network port, they manage the entire
machine.

They do, but only when my wife asks them to.

> You spout some stupid shit sometimes.

I spout stuff that you think you understand, but don't.

> But again your issue has nothing to do with Microsoft.

That's your theory. Nothing you've said inclines me to take your opinion seriously.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:50c2e5b3-dfbe-4166-a4af-60aaa9f4d757@googlegroups.com:

The machine (and the laptop) has Norton 360 running for protection
against virus attacks - I've been putting their protection
software on my machines for about twenty years now, and it does
seem to work.

But you obviously have NOT been keeping up on Windows 7
vulnerabilities. Or you would not have spouted that stupid shit.
Ask Norton if they recommend a person even running a Windows 7 machine
on an Internet conneted network. they will tell you not to use it for
any transactions.

If your system is able to be compromised, a virus scan AFTER the fact
is not going to do a lot for you. All of your info was already hacked
and they did not even have to write ANY file for you precious scanner
to find. Ooops!

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:b18fd15e-8efc-4fe4-97b8-24f46afaa78d@googlegroups.com:

That isn't what my wife's employers did. Her computer got
Microsoft up-dates just as mine did.

Companies rarely set up their machines to be "auto-updated".
Never, in fact if they have 'an IT guy'.

This must be an exception.

No. A company WITH an IT department would NOT have a Windows 7 box
on its network. So THAT is the exception, twerp.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 1:17:14 AM UTC+10, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:50c2e5b3-dfbe-4166-a4af-60aaa9f4d757@googlegroups.com:

The machine (and the laptop) has Norton 360 running for protection
against virus attacks - I've been putting their protection
software on my machines for about twenty years now, and it does
seem to work.

But you obviously have NOT been keeping up on Windows 7
vulnerabilities. Or you would not have spouted that stupid shit.
Ask Norton if they recommend a person even running a Windows 7 machine
on an Internet conneted network. they will tell you not to use it for
any transactions.

Not a warning I've had from Norton. I do pay attention to those warning that I do get.

If your system is able to be compromised, a virus scan AFTER the fact
is not going to do a lot for you. All of your info was already hacked
and they did not even have to write ANY file for you precious scanner
to find. Ooops!

Norton scans incoming messages for viruses before they get anywhere where they might get run. You clearly don't know how their protection system works.

If I were silly enough to click on a suspect web-site after I'd been warned that it was suspect, I could get into trouble, but I haven't done that yet, and I've been linked to the internet for some twenty years now.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 1:07:00 AM UTC+10, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:b18fd15e-8efc-4fe4-97b8-24f46afaa78d@googlegroups.com:

That isn't what my wife's employers did. Her computer got
Microsoft up-dates just as mine did.

Companies rarely set up their machines to be "auto-updated".
Never, in fact if they have 'an IT guy'.

This must be an exception.

No. A company WITH an IT department would NOT have a Windows 7 box
on its network. So THAT is the exception, twerp.

My wife's computer did get up-dated to Windows 10 some time ago (as I seem to recall mentioning). In fact it got replaced by a newer model at the same time. The twerp here is you.

--
Bill Sloman., sydney

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:ee3514a1-70c4-43d6-8cf4-8bdbb51d6ecf@googlegroups.com:

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 1:17:14 AM UTC+10,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:50c2e5b3-dfbe-4166-a4af-60aaa9f4d757@googlegroups.com:

The machine (and the laptop) has Norton 360 running for
protection against virus attacks - I've been putting their
protection software on my machines for about twenty years now,
and it does seem to work.

But you obviously have NOT been keeping up on Windows 7
vulnerabilities. Or you would not have spouted that stupid shit.
Ask Norton if they recommend a person even running a Windows 7
machine on an Internet conneted network. they will tell you not
to use it for any transactions.

Not a warning I've had from Norton. I do pay attention to those
warning that I do get.

Your machine is likely old enough to have messed up Intel microcode
in it, and that coupled with W7 IS a vulnerability they would NOT be
'warning you' about.

If your system is able to be compromised, a virus scan AFTER
the fact
is not going to do a lot for you. All of your info was already
hacked and they did not even have to write ANY file for you
precious scanner to find. Ooops!

Norton scans incoming messages for viruses before they get
anywhere where they might get run.

The W7 vulnerablility is not viral. It is direct IP hack IN.
Suddenly WHAM, you box locks for ransom.

You clearly don't know how
their protection system works.

Again, I told you it is not a viral vulnerability. More a base
kernel level hole that cannot be fixed on *that* old OS.

If I were silly enough to click on a suspect web-site after I'd
been warned that it was suspect, I could get into trouble, but I
haven't done that yet, and I've been linked to the internet for
some twenty years now.

Again, your IP can get snooped externally and a W7 machine can be
hacked directly. No user clicky clicky required.

Easy peasy SloManFoo Google 'windows 7 direct hack vulnerability'
And an entire page pops full of hits and MS warned on Jan of 2020.

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:8307962e-e13d-4e8b-9835-6923cfd071b8@googlegroups.com:

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 1:07:00 AM UTC+10,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:b18fd15e-8efc-4fe4-97b8-24f46afaa78d@googlegroups.com:

That isn't what my wife's employers did. Her computer got
Microsoft up-dates just as mine did.

Companies rarely set up their machines to be "auto-updated".

Never, in fact if they have 'an IT guy'.

This must be an exception.

No. A company WITH an IT department would NOT have a Windows 7
box
on its network. So THAT is the exception, twerp.

My wife's computer did get up-dated to Windows 10 some time ago
(as I seem to recall mentioning). In fact it got replaced by a
newer model at the same time. The twerp here is you.

OK so now you are saying it IS two different OSes.

AGAIN, more PROOF that it is NOT an MS issue.

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2020-05-03, mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote:

On Saturday, May 2, 2020 at 3:40:07 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
I don't know if it's related, but I've had problems with my NAS server when the ISP provider changes out the modem.

Did the problem start with the "fiber to the building" transition, or do you think they're unrelated?

Otherwise, all I can offer is that we have an HP All-in-one printer that (for whatever reason) likes to change its fixed IP address from time to time. It often requires wireless-only end users to remove and reinstall the printer from the network. Very frustrating.

On the LAN side, we can lock that printer down by MAC address, and so it doesn't suffer the same problems from those who have a wired-LAN connection to our network.

turn off the printers wifi and only use the cabled connection then it
will have a static address, not that that will help much: the windows
HP drivers are failrly borked if you hsve two printers on diffferent
LANs

--
Jasen.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 2:34:40 PM UTC+10, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:8307962e-e13d-4e8b-9835-6923cfd071b8@googlegroups.com:

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 1:07:00 AM UTC+10,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:b18fd15e-8efc-4fe4-97b8-24f46afaa78d@googlegroups.com:

That isn't what my wife's employers did. Her computer got
Microsoft up-dates just as mine did.

Companies rarely set up their machines to be "auto-updated".

Never, in fact if they have 'an IT guy'.

This must be an exception.

No. A company WITH an IT department would NOT have a Windows 7
box
on its network. So THAT is the exception, twerp.

My wife's computer did get up-dated to Windows 10 some time ago
(as I seem to recall mentioning). In fact it got replaced by a
newer model at the same time. The twerp here is you.

OK so now you are saying it IS two different OSes.

AGAIN, more PROOF that it is NOT an MS issue.

Not exactly. If Microsoft decided to "refine" their management of Ethernet links, they'd probably use the same algorithm for all their operating systems.

--
Bil Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 2:44:55 PM UTC+10, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:ee3514a1-70c4-43d6-8cf4-8bdbb51d6ecf@googlegroups.com:

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 1:17:14 AM UTC+10,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:50c2e5b3-dfbe-4166-a4af-60aaa9f4d757@googlegroups.com:

<snip>

Google 'windows 7 direct hack vulnerability'
And an entire page pops full of hits and MS warned on Jan of 2020.

Microsoft-inspired scare stories designed to get people to move to Windows 10.

As happens rather too frequently with you, you don't seem to know enough about what you are talking about.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 4:32:47 PM UTC+10, Jasen Betts wrote:

On 2020-05-03, mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote:
On Saturday, May 2, 2020 at 3:40:07 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
I don't know if it's related, but I've had problems with my NAS server when the ISP provider changes out the modem.

Did the problem start with the "fiber to the building" transition, or do you think they're unrelated?

Otherwise, all I can offer is that we have an HP All-in-one printer that (for whatever reason) likes to change its fixed IP address from time to time. It often requires wireless-only end users to remove and reinstall the printer from the network. Very frustrating.

On the LAN side, we can lock that printer down by MAC address, and so it doesn't suffer the same problems from those who have a wired-LAN connection to our network.

turn off the printers wifi and only use the cabled connection then it
will have a static address, not that that will help much: the windows
HP drivers are failrly borked if you hsve two printers on diffferent
LANs

It's not the printer that is a problem. I just switched to a USB link.

The real problem is that I used to use an Ethernet over mains wiring local area connection to our router-modem where WiFi link was a bit too weak to give good data rates. It worked for years, but stopped working a few monhts ago at roughly the same time that my - very local - Ethernet link from just my computer to my - unshared - printer stopped working.

The transition to fibre-to-the-basement was entirely painless (apart for the fact that phone company decide that they wanted to change our phone number at the same time - as a consequence of choosing to split themselves up at the time, which didn't last).

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:59133f6c-6417-494e-8120-7df13178a5a1@googlegroups.com:

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 2:44:55 PM UTC+10,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:ee3514a1-70c4-43d6-8cf4-8bdbb51d6ecf@googlegroups.com:

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 1:17:14 AM UTC+10,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:50c2e5b3-dfbe-4166-a4af-60aaa9f4d757@googlegroups.com:

snip

Google 'windows 7 direct hack vulnerability'
And an entire page pops full of hits and MS warned on Jan of
2020.

Microsoft-inspired scare stories designed to get people to move to
Windows 10.

As happens rather too frequently with you, you don't seem to know
enough about what you are talking about.

You really are Trump level stupid, boy.

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:172c353d-b447-4ea6-9108-6079be4b087d@googlegroups.com:

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 2:34:40 PM UTC+10,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:8307962e-e13d-4e8b-9835-6923cfd071b8@googlegroups.com:

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 1:07:00 AM UTC+10,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:b18fd15e-8efc-4fe4-97b8-24f46afaa78d@googlegroups.com:

That isn't what my wife's employers did. Her computer got
Microsoft up-dates just as mine did.

Companies rarely set up their machines to be
"auto-updated".

Never, in fact if they have 'an IT guy'.

This must be an exception.

No. A company WITH an IT department would NOT have a
Windows 7 box
on its network. So THAT is the exception, twerp.

My wife's computer did get up-dated to Windows 10 some time ago
(as I seem to recall mentioning). In fact it got replaced by a
newer model at the same time. The twerp here is you.

OK so now you are saying it IS two different OSes.

AGAIN, more PROOF that it is NOT an MS issue.

Not exactly. If Microsoft decided to "refine" their management of
Ethernet links, they'd probably use the same algorithm for all
their operating systems.

UR1S2pid motherfucker.

PC user class 1 thru 10, you might rate a 3.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 10:03:53 PM UTC+10, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:59133f6c-6417-494e-8120-7df13178a5a1@googlegroups.com:

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 2:44:55 PM UTC+10,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:ee3514a1-70c4-43d6-8cf4-8bdbb51d6ecf@googlegroups.com:

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 1:17:14 AM UTC+10,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:50c2e5b3-dfbe-4166-a4af-60aaa9f4d757@googlegroups.com:

snip

Google 'windows 7 direct hack vulnerability'
And an entire page pops full of hits and MS warned on Jan of
2020.

Microsoft-inspired scare stories designed to get people to move to
Windows 10.

As happens rather too frequently with you, you don't seem to know
enough about what you are talking about.

You really are Trump level stupid, boy.

And you are AlwaysWrong - which isn't remotely true either.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2020-05-04, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 4:32:47 PM UTC+10, Jasen Betts wrote:
On 2020-05-03, mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote:
On Saturday, May 2, 2020 at 3:40:07 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
I don't know if it's related, but I've had problems with my NAS server when the ISP provider changes out the modem.

Did the problem start with the "fiber to the building" transition, or do you think they're unrelated?

Otherwise, all I can offer is that we have an HP All-in-one printer that (for whatever reason) likes to change its fixed IP address from time to time. It often requires wireless-only end users to remove and reinstall the printer from the network. Very frustrating.

On the LAN side, we can lock that printer down by MAC address, and so it doesn't suffer the same problems from those who have a wired-LAN connection to our network.

turn off the printers wifi and only use the cabled connection then it
will have a static address, not that that will help much: the windows
HP drivers are failrly borked if you hsve two printers on diffferent
LANs

It's not the printer that is a problem. I just switched to a USB link.

I was answering a slightly different issue.

The real problem is that I used to use an Ethernet over mains wiring
local area connection to our router-modem where WiFi link was a bit
too weak to give good data rates.

yuck.... but if you can reach the internet over that link I guess it's
working.

It worked for years, but stopped
working a few monhts ago at roughly the same time that my - very local
- Ethernet link from just my computer to my - unshared - printer
stopped working.

possibly the same time or definately not the same time?

Could it be that your router has been confugured to isolate its
LAN ethernet sockets, so that device(s) connected to one cannot reach
devices conneted to another?

Substituting in a switch and using only a single router socket would
be one way to check for this. crawling through the router setup menus
would be another.

The transition to fibre-to-the-basement was entirely painless (apart
for the fact that phone company decide that they wanted to change our
phone number at the same time - as a consequence of choosing to split
themselves up at the time, which didn't last).

--
Jasen.

 

[Martin Brown]

On 03/05/2020 04:36, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Sunday, May 3, 2020 at 1:30:01 PM UTC+10, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:d1598c4d-069a-4220-aa5c-0320942a17a7@googlegroups.com:

I used to connect my printer to my computer over an Ethernet link,
but some months ago that stopped working. I replaced the Ethernet
cable with a USB cable plugged into the printer's USB port and
didn't think much about it.

But my wife's computer used to be linked up to our broad-band link
(now fibre to the building) by an ethernet link over the mains
wiring, and that stopped working a the much the same time. My
lap-top (which I don't use very often) exploited the same link,
and that stopped working too.

A google search threw up enough responses to make it clear that
other people have had much the same problem. Microsoft has
proposed some solutions that ought to work, but I've tried all of
them and none of them do.

Has anybody run into the problem, and found a solution that works?

Our resident conspiracy theory nuts will invent a theory about
Microsoft conspiring with the US spooks to force people onto WiFi
links which are easier to snoop than Ethernet connections, but I'm
happy to assume that Microsoft has just done something stupid.


In my first response, I only read a bit in and was responding to
you regarding the first device you mentioned.

Had I read further, I would have told you it was your router, which
I assure you it is.

You then went on to spout some shit about Microsoft, but it has
nothing to do with MS either.

MS has nothing to do with a network attached and accessed printer,
when it is also coupled with other 'clients' on the network having
access problems then it is not a Windows or MS problem.

The local area links worked fine for years. Nothing has changed in the systems involved except the regular Windows up-dates.

Does ipconfig/all show that the PC network adapter has a sensible IP
address? Can you ping other things on the network and share files?

Try accessing the printers status user interface from a web browser.

I would be willing to bet that it isn't at the same IP address as it was
when you originally installed it. Mine does that sometimes when there is
a power outage (or rather did before I locked down its MAC to always get
the same IP). Check the router table to see where the printer is.

Manually changing the printer IP address in the driver to match the
presently allocated value will probably sort the problem.


--
Regards,
Martin Brown