My Sony Vaio SZ440 running Vista Business was severly afflicted by the
"local only" wireless bug, and nothing seemed to help -- I edited the
registry, disabled TCP/IPv6, changed the power settings, etc., yet I would
still lose internet connectivity at least several times a day, and sometimes
much more often. Some time ago, Sony put out an upgrade for its drivers --
this particular upgrade affected ONLY its nVidia graphics card and the
Realtek audio driver. For some reason, I never got around to installing
these two updates until a couple of weeks ago. Once they went in, my
wireless networking stabilized -- the "local only" bug crops only once a day
or less, though it still takes a long time to acquire DNS and DHCP settings,
they almost always go through first try, and an irritating "vanishing
wireless networks" bug that used to happen everyother day is now down to
once every two weeks.

So, Sony updates their graphics and sound drivers and my wireless under
Vista gets more reliable.

Go figure.

Have you checked if there is a new firmware for the wireless router?

--
Bob Lin, MS-MVP, MCSE & CNE
Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Troubleshooting on
http://www.ChicagoTech.net
How to Setup Windows, Network, VPN & Remote Access on
http://www.HowToNetworking.com


"PTravel" wrote in message
...
My Sony Vaio SZ440 running Vista Business was severly afflicted by the
"local only" wireless bug, and nothing seemed to help -- I edited the
registry, disabled TCP/IPv6, changed the power settings, etc., yet I would
still lose internet connectivity at least several times a day, and
sometimes much more often. Some time ago, Sony put out an upgrade for its
drivers -- this particular upgrade affected ONLY its nVidia graphics card
and the Realtek audio driver. For some reason, I never got around to
installing these two updates until a couple of weeks ago. Once they went
in, my wireless networking stabilized -- the "local only" bug crops only
once a day or less, though it still takes a long time to acquire DNS and
DHCP settings, they almost always go through first try, and an irritating
"vanishing wireless networks" bug that used to happen everyother day is
now down to once every two weeks.

So, Sony updates their graphics and sound drivers and my wireless under
Vista gets more reliable.

Go figure.

The wireless router that is most problematic belongs to my firm. I have no
access to it, other than I can connect for internet access. I am, however,
very tired of Microsoft's claim that it is a router problem that results in
the "local only" bug -- it is not. Routers are manufactured compliant to
specific standards and, not surprisingly, all performed just fine until
Vista came out. Microsoft re-wrote the IP stack (among other things) for
Vista and, in so doing, clearly failed to comply with the spec, as Vista,
and only Vista, has this very well documented and near universal problem.

If it was only one or two router brands that had this problem, you might
have a point. That it is all of them suggests that the problem isn't the
hardware, but Vista.

However, back to my original point, i.e. that the problem was considerably
ameliorated on my machine by updated drivers for completely unrelated
hardware, also suggests that there is something going on in the OS that is
clearly a bug -- an audio and graphics driver shouldn't have anything to do
with a driver for a wireless NIC and/or the support implementation in the
OS. However, they did.

I'm not one of those people that knock Vista -- aside from the "local only"
bug, I've been very satisfied with the OS and, though I wouldn't recommend
it to anyone else until SP1 is released, have no plans to install XP on my
laptop, and actually enjoy a number of Vista features. However, it is
completely irresponsible of Microsoft to ignore compatibility with an
established standard and insist that the world change to accommodate the
"improvements" introduced in Vista.


"Robert L (MS-MVP)" wrote in message
...
Have you checked if there is a new firmware for the wireless router?

--
Bob Lin, MS-MVP, MCSE & CNE
Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Troubleshooting on
http://www.ChicagoTech.net
How to Setup Windows, Network, VPN & Remote Access on
http://www.HowToNetworking.com


"PTravel" wrote in message
...
My Sony Vaio SZ440 running Vista Business was severly afflicted by the
"local only" wireless bug, and nothing seemed to help -- I edited the
registry, disabled TCP/IPv6, changed the power settings, etc., yet I
would still lose internet connectivity at least several times a day, and
sometimes much more often. Some time ago, Sony put out an upgrade for
its drivers -- this particular upgrade affected ONLY its nVidia graphics
card and the Realtek audio driver. For some reason, I never got around
to installing these two updates until a couple of weeks ago. Once they
went in, my wireless networking stabilized -- the "local only" bug crops
only once a day or less, though it still takes a long time to acquire DNS
and DHCP settings, they almost always go through first try, and an
irritating "vanishing wireless networks" bug that used to happen
everyother day is now down to once every two weeks.

So, Sony updates their graphics and sound drivers and my wireless under
Vista gets more reliable.

Go figure.

The question is still valid.
The manufacturer may have updates something that may eliminate the
issue.
Have you updated the firmware, or at least asked those that have
control?

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"PTravel" wrote in message
...
The wireless router that is most problematic belongs to my firm. I
have no access to it, other than I can connect for internet access.
I am, however, very tired of Microsoft's claim that it is a router
problem that results in the "local only" bug -- it is not. Routers
are manufactured compliant to specific standards and, not
surprisingly, all performed just fine until Vista came out.
Microsoft re-wrote the IP stack (among other things) for Vista and,
in so doing, clearly failed to comply with the spec, as Vista, and
only Vista, has this very well documented and near universal
problem.

If it was only one or two router brands that had this problem, you
might have a point. That it is all of them suggests that the
problem isn't the hardware, but Vista.

However, back to my original point, i.e. that the problem was
considerably ameliorated on my machine by updated drivers for
completely unrelated hardware, also suggests that there is something
going on in the OS that is clearly a bug -- an audio and graphics
driver shouldn't have anything to do with a driver for a wireless
NIC and/or the support implementation in the OS. However, they did.

I'm not one of those people that knock Vista -- aside from the
"local only" bug, I've been very satisfied with the OS and, though I
wouldn't recommend it to anyone else until SP1 is released, have no
plans to install XP on my laptop, and actually enjoy a number of
Vista features. However, it is completely irresponsible of
Microsoft to ignore compatibility with an established standard and
insist that the world change to accommodate the "improvements"
introduced in Vista.

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
...
The question is still valid.
The manufacturer may have updates something that may eliminate the issue.
Have you updated the firmware, or at least asked those that have control?

As I said, I don't control the router at my fim, so I can't upgrade the
firmware. I have asked them to work on the problem -- no firmware upgrades
are available, or, at least, so says the ISP that provides it. It is not
part of my job function to either ride herd on IT or interface with our ISP
vendor.

I also don't control the routers in my clients' offices, in airport lounges,
in hotels and in other places at which I have to access the internet. I
have no intention of asking all those people to upgrade their router
firmware.



--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"PTravel" wrote in message
...
The wireless router that is most problematic belongs to my firm. I have
no access to it, other than I can connect for internet access. I am,
however, very tired of Microsoft's claim that it is a router problem that
results in the "local only" bug -- it is not. Routers are manufactured
compliant to specific standards and, not surprisingly, all performed just
fine until Vista came out. Microsoft re-wrote the IP stack (among other
things) for Vista and, in so doing, clearly failed to comply with the
spec, as Vista, and only Vista, has this very well documented and near
universal problem.

If it was only one or two router brands that had this problem, you might
have a point. That it is all of them suggests that the problem isn't the
hardware, but Vista.

However, back to my original point, i.e. that the problem was
considerably ameliorated on my machine by updated drivers for completely
unrelated hardware, also suggests that there is something going on in the
OS that is clearly a bug -- an audio and graphics driver shouldn't have
anything to do with a driver for a wireless NIC and/or the support
implementation in the OS. However, they did.

I'm not one of those people that knock Vista -- aside from the "local
only" bug, I've been very satisfied with the OS and, though I wouldn't
recommend it to anyone else until SP1 is released, have no plans to
install XP on my laptop, and actually enjoy a number of Vista features.
However, it is completely irresponsible of Microsoft to ignore
compatibility with an established standard and insist that the world
change to accommodate the "improvements" introduced in Vista.

Whether you control something is irrelevant.
If there is a hardware fix and it is not applied, those making that
decision do so representing the users who may be handicapped or
benefit by that decision.
If there is something that can be done to the hardware and it is not,
that may be something the users of that hardware have to deal with.

Few if any ISPs make their own hardware.
Instead they purchase from others.
The actual manufacturer and not the ISP is normally the best source
for information and updates.

Assuming it is a Microsoft issue, you will need to wait for Microsoft.

However if it is a hardware issue or a combination Microsoft/hardware
and those responsible do little to maintain the hardware, then they
also share in the responsibility for problems caused for the users.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"PTravel" wrote in message
...

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
...
The question is still valid.
The manufacturer may have updates something that may eliminate the
issue.
Have you updated the firmware, or at least asked those that have
control?

As I said, I don't control the router at my fim, so I can't upgrade
the firmware. I have asked them to work on the problem -- no
firmware upgrades are available, or, at least, so says the ISP that
provides it. It is not part of my job function to either ride herd
on IT or interface with our ISP vendor.

I also don't control the routers in my clients' offices, in airport
lounges, in hotels and in other places at which I have to access the
internet. I have no intention of asking all those people to upgrade
their router firmware.

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
...
Whether you control something is irrelevant.

It's highly relevant. Microsoft released something that is not to spec but
is supposed to be. In a typical month, I probably access two dozen routers,
only one of which I have any control over. What am I supposed to do about
those systems?

If there is a hardware fix and it is not applied, those making that
decision do so representing the users who may be handicapped or benefit by
that decision.

Or Microsoft could simply fix their buggy wireless implementation. It is
neither efficient nor logical to expect everyone else to comply with a
unilateral demand to support something off-spec and proprietary. I'd rather
see hardware vendors devote their resources to producing better hardware,
rather than spending money and time on kludging a fix to accomodate
Microsoft's errors. Wasting resources on making up for Microsoft's mistake
is ridiculous.

If there is something that can be done to the hardware and it is not, that
may be something the users of that hardware have to deal with.

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. There is a reason for industry standards.
Microsoft, evidently, believes it gets to define its own standard. If so,
Microsoft is swimming upstream.


Few if any ISPs make their own hardware.
Instead they purchase from others.
The actual manufacturer and not the ISP is normally the best source for
information and updates.

You, like Microsoft, are taking a very narrow view of how people use their
computers. As an example, airline club rooms use whatever wifi service is
contracted by the airlines' IT departments. There may be multiple ISP
contracts, with multiple routers supplied. Do you really expect the airline
to track what hardware each ISP provided, contact each manufacturer,
ascertain whether or not a firmware upgrade is available, and then install
it? The problem is particularly exacerabted by the fact that only Vista
users (and not every Vista user) is going to encounter this bug. Given that
Microsoft denies the problem even exists, why would you expect it to be
reasonable for airline IT departments to even know about it? What do you
expect club room users to do when they are in a new city and need to check
their email NOW?

Multiply that by the number of people visiting client offices, staying in
hotels, etc. and then explain what all these people should do. Sorry, but
simply dismissing the problem Microsoft created as the responsibility of
those who control the routers is, to put it charitably, naive.

Assuming it is a Microsoft issue, you will need to wait for Microsoft.

How could it not be a Microsoft issue if the problem occurs with the
products of multiple manufacturers (including mainstream major manufacturers
like Netgear and Cisco/Linksys) and only with Vista?

However if it is a hardware issue or a combination Microsoft/hardware and
those responsible do little to maintain the hardware, then they also share
in the responsibility for problems caused for the users.

Except that it is not a hardware issue -- if it was, XP, 2000, 98 and 95
machines, not to mention Mac and Linux machines, would exhibit the same
problem. They don't. This is a Vista bug and, sadly, appears to be one of
those bugs that I think of as "waive a dead chicken in a bag" problem, i.e.
though my wifi connection (finally) appears relatively stable (though not as
stable as my XP machines), I have no way of knowing exactly which of the
various fixes and updates (both those related to Vista reliability and those
with no conceivable connection to the wifi bug) was responsible for fixing
the problem. Waiving the dead chicken in a bag has worked for me for the
time being. Who knows, though, whether the next fix will undo whatever
magic I have wrought up 'til now.

And, finally, I've yet to hear of anyone who has been able to fix this
problem with a router firmware upgrade. I don't doubt that there are old
routers out there that need a firmware update regardless, and I also don't
doubt that there are cheap off-brand routers out there that are out of spec.
However, these newsgroups have endless reports of people using the latest
firmware in the name-brand routers who continue to experience this problem
(and I'm one of them -- at home, I run a brand new Netgear with the latest
firmware upgrade, and still experience the "local only" bug with my Vista
Business-equipped laptop but not my XP laptop).

I repeat:

It does a tremendous disservice (and particularly to naive users seeking
assistance in these forums) to suggest "upgrade your router firmware" as a
first step in trying to solve the "local only" bug. The problem is not the
hardware. It is Vista. There are a number of software kludges, which I've
previously described, that can ameliorate the problem and those should be
tried first on any network that can support wireless reliably on non-Vista
systems.



--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"PTravel" wrote in message
...

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
...
The question is still valid.
The manufacturer may have updates something that may eliminate the
issue.
Have you updated the firmware, or at least asked those that have
control?

As I said, I don't control the router at my fim, so I can't upgrade the
firmware. I have asked them to work on the problem -- no firmware
upgrades are available, or, at least, so says the ISP that provides it.
It is not part of my job function to either ride herd on IT or interface
with our ISP vendor.

I also don't control the routers in my clients' offices, in airport
lounges, in hotels and in other places at which I have to access the
internet. I have no intention of asking all those people to upgrade
their router firmware.

"What am I supposed to do about..."
Apparently nothing since you have no influence over the organizations
that use them.

"Wasting resources on making up for Microsoft's mistake..."
I was referring to people and organizations using that equipment.
They have a responsibility to do what they can to keep their hardware
updated.

"Sorry, it doesn't work that way."
Yes, it does.
If there are problems with the hardware or software, the users will
most certainly have to deal with it, after all they will be
experiencing it.

"Do you really expect the airline to track what hardware each..."
If security of the network is important to them than the answer is
yes.
That is one of the jobs of the IT department in any organization.
Keep track and maintain all equipment.

"why would you expect it to be reasonable for airline IT departments"
Because their users and customers inform them when there are problems.
If no one ever says anything a problem may go untreated for some time.
What have they said when you communicated your issues to them?

"...simply dismissing the problem..."
No one suggested that, those are entirely your words.

"How could it not be a Microsoft issue"
Maybe it is or maybe not, I will not assume either way.

"Except that it is not a hardware issue -- if it was..."
Another assumption.
Hardware often needs changes to deal with a different operating
system, drivers are a huge example.

"Waiving the dead chicken...magic..."
This makes it sound like you are depending to much on luck.
There is no such thing as luck, good or bad.
Other things come into play but luck has NOTHING to do with it.

"upgrade your router firmware"
That is a very valid fix oftentimes.
You should check the purpose of a firmware update before discounting
the problem as entirely someone else's.
Many problems have multiple causes and a complete solution may come in
parts from multiple sources.
One of those sources is often driver and firmware updates.
Choosing to ignore one area because a belief all fault is elsewhere
takes people back to "chicken...magic...".

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"PTravel" wrote in message
...

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
...
Whether you control something is irrelevant.

It's highly relevant. Microsoft released something that is not to
spec but is supposed to be. In a typical month, I probably access
two dozen routers, only one of which I have any control over. What
am I supposed to do about those systems?

If there is a hardware fix and it is not applied, those making that
decision do so representing the users who may be handicapped or
benefit by that decision.

Or Microsoft could simply fix their buggy wireless implementation.
It is neither efficient nor logical to expect everyone else to
comply with a unilateral demand to support something off-spec and
proprietary. I'd rather see hardware vendors devote their resources
to producing better hardware, rather than spending money and time on
kludging a fix to accomodate Microsoft's errors. Wasting resources
on making up for Microsoft's mistake is ridiculous.

If there is something that can be done to the hardware and it is
not, that may be something the users of that hardware have to deal
with.

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. There is a reason for industry
standards. Microsoft, evidently, believes it gets to define its own
standard. If so, Microsoft is swimming upstream.


Few if any ISPs make their own hardware.
Instead they purchase from others.
The actual manufacturer and not the ISP is normally the best source
for information and updates.

You, like Microsoft, are taking a very narrow view of how people use
their computers. As an example, airline club rooms use whatever
wifi service is contracted by the airlines' IT departments. There
may be multiple ISP contracts, with multiple routers supplied. Do
you really expect the airline to track what hardware each ISP
provided, contact each manufacturer, ascertain whether or not a
firmware upgrade is available, and then install it? The problem is
particularly exacerabted by the fact that only Vista users (and not
every Vista user) is going to encounter this bug. Given that
Microsoft denies the problem even exists, why would you expect it to
be reasonable for airline IT departments to even know about it?
What do you expect club room users to do when they are in a new city
and need to check their email NOW?

Multiply that by the number of people visiting client offices,
staying in hotels, etc. and then explain what all these people
should do. Sorry, but simply dismissing the problem Microsoft
created as the responsibility of those who control the routers is,
to put it charitably, naive.

Assuming it is a Microsoft issue, you will need to wait for
Microsoft.

How could it not be a Microsoft issue if the problem occurs with the
products of multiple manufacturers (including mainstream major
manufacturers like Netgear and Cisco/Linksys) and only with Vista?

However if it is a hardware issue or a combination
Microsoft/hardware and those responsible do little to maintain the
hardware, then they also share in the responsibility for problems
caused for the users.

Except that it is not a hardware issue -- if it was, XP, 2000, 98
and 95 machines, not to mention Mac and Linux machines, would
exhibit the same problem. They don't. This is a Vista bug and,
sadly, appears to be one of those bugs that I think of as "waive a
dead chicken in a bag" problem, i.e. though my wifi connection
(finally) appears relatively stable (though not as stable as my XP
machines), I have no way of knowing exactly which of the various
fixes and updates (both those related to Vista reliability and those
with no conceivable connection to the wifi bug) was responsible for
fixing the problem. Waiving the dead chicken in a bag has worked
for me for the time being. Who knows, though, whether the next fix
will undo whatever magic I have wrought up 'til now.

And, finally, I've yet to hear of anyone who has been able to fix
this problem with a router firmware upgrade. I don't doubt that
there are old routers out there that need a firmware update
regardless, and I also don't doubt that there are cheap off-brand
routers out there that are out of spec. However, these newsgroups
have endless reports of people using the latest firmware in the
name-brand routers who continue to experience this problem (and I'm
one of them -- at home, I run a brand new Netgear with the latest
firmware upgrade, and still experience the "local only" bug with my
Vista Business-equipped laptop but not my XP laptop).

I repeat:

It does a tremendous disservice (and particularly to naive users
seeking assistance in these forums) to suggest "upgrade your router
firmware" as a first step in trying to solve the "local only" bug.
The problem is not the hardware. It is Vista. There are a number
of software kludges, which I've previously described, that can
ameliorate the problem and those should be tried first on any
network that can support wireless reliably on non-Vista systems.

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
...
"What am I supposed to do about..."
Apparently nothing since you have no influence over the organizations that
use them.

Exactly, yet I am saddled with a Vista laptop that has connection issues
with the modem.


"Wasting resources on making up for Microsoft's mistake..."
I was referring to people and organizations using that equipment.
They have a responsibility to do what they can to keep their hardware
updated.

Not when "updated" means modified to work with non-standard OS interfaces.


"Sorry, it doesn't work that way."
Yes, it does.
If there are problems with the hardware or software, the users will most
certainly have to deal with it, after all they will be experiencing it.

There are no problems with the hardware or the firmware that runs it. The
problem is with Microsoft's implementation of non-standard wireless.



"Do you really expect the airline to track what hardware each..."
If security of the network is important to them than the answer is yes.
That is one of the jobs of the IT department in any organization.
Keep track and maintain all equipment.

Routers in airport lounges are after-thoughts for the IT department. And
they work just fine. Just not with Vista.


"why would you expect it to be reasonable for airline IT departments"
Because their users and customers inform them when there are problems.
If no one ever says anything a problem may go untreated for some time.
What have they said when you communicated your issues to them?

How would you expect me to contact an airline IT department? You have a
very odd understanding of how business people use their computer hardware.
If my laptop won't connect in a clubroom, I use my BlackBerry instead. I
don't have the time to try and get to some CSR (who is probably in India)
and explain the problem which Microsoft won't admit exists.


"...simply dismissing the problem..."
No one suggested that, those are entirely your words.

You dismiss the problem when you blame the router firmware.


"How could it not be a Microsoft issue"
Maybe it is or maybe not, I will not assume either way.

You're the IT expert, not me. Explain to me why this problem occurs only
with Vista and across brands of modems.


"Except that it is not a hardware issue -- if it was..."
Another assumption.
Hardware often needs changes to deal with a different operating system,
drivers are a huge example.

Sorry, that's completely disingenuous. Drivers support specific hardware by
providing an interface to the OS. No router requires a driver and, in fact,
all routers work across multiple OSs -- except for Vista.


"Waiving the dead chicken...magic..."
This makes it sound like you are depending to much on luck.

Yep. I got lucky -- something happened in my machine that increased the
reliability of the wireless link dramatically. Since nothing I did relates
to the wireless nic, it has to be luck.

There is no such thing as luck, good or bad.
Other things come into play but luck has NOTHING to do with it.

Luck had everything to do with it. None of the suggested fixes, official or
not, had worked.


"upgrade your router firmware"
That is a very valid fix oftentimes.

When? Show me one post from someone with this problem who, upon upgrading
their firmware, no longer experienced the "local only" bug.

You should check the purpose of a firmware update before discounting the
problem as entirely someone else's.
Many problems have multiple causes and a complete solution may come in
parts from multiple sources.
One of those sources is often driver and firmware updates.

I though you were an IT person. What wifi router do you know that needs a
driver on the client PC?

Choosing to ignore one area because a belief all fault is elsewhere takes
people back to "chicken...magic...".

Exactly. And Microsoft (and, when you suggest upgrading router firmware as
a first line of defense, you) are ignoring the elephant in the room, namely
Microsoft's re-write of the IP stack which is responsible for the local-only
bug.



--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"PTravel" wrote in message
...

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
...
Whether you control something is irrelevant.

It's highly relevant. Microsoft released something that is not to spec
but is supposed to be. In a typical month, I probably access two dozen
routers, only one of which I have any control over. What am I supposed
to do about those systems?

If there is a hardware fix and it is not applied, those making that
decision do so representing the users who may be handicapped or benefit
by that decision.

Or Microsoft could simply fix their buggy wireless implementation. It is
neither efficient nor logical to expect everyone else to comply with a
unilateral demand to support something off-spec and proprietary. I'd
rather see hardware vendors devote their resources to producing better
hardware, rather than spending money and time on kludging a fix to
accomodate Microsoft's errors. Wasting resources on making up for
Microsoft's mistake is ridiculous.

If there is something that can be done to the hardware and it is not,
that may be something the users of that hardware have to deal with.

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. There is a reason for industry
standards. Microsoft, evidently, believes it gets to define its own
standard. If so, Microsoft is swimming upstream.


Few if any ISPs make their own hardware.
Instead they purchase from others.
The actual manufacturer and not the ISP is normally the best source for
information and updates.

You, like Microsoft, are taking a very narrow view of how people use
their computers. As an example, airline club rooms use whatever wifi
service is contracted by the airlines' IT departments. There may be
multiple ISP contracts, with multiple routers supplied. Do you really
expect the airline to track what hardware each ISP provided, contact each
manufacturer, ascertain whether or not a firmware upgrade is available,
and then install it? The problem is particularly exacerabted by the fact
that only Vista users (and not every Vista user) is going to encounter
this bug. Given that Microsoft denies the problem even exists, why would
you expect it to be reasonable for airline IT departments to even know
about it? What do you expect club room users to do when they are in a new
city and need to check their email NOW?

Multiply that by the number of people visiting client offices, staying in
hotels, etc. and then explain what all these people should do. Sorry,
but simply dismissing the problem Microsoft created as the responsibility
of those who control the routers is, to put it charitably, naive.

Assuming it is a Microsoft issue, you will need to wait for Microsoft.

How could it not be a Microsoft issue if the problem occurs with the
products of multiple manufacturers (including mainstream major
manufacturers like Netgear and Cisco/Linksys) and only with Vista?

However if it is a hardware issue or a combination Microsoft/hardware
and those responsible do little to maintain the hardware, then they also
share in the responsibility for problems caused for the users.

Except that it is not a hardware issue -- if it was, XP, 2000, 98 and 95
machines, not to mention Mac and Linux machines, would exhibit the same
problem. They don't. This is a Vista bug and, sadly, appears to be one
of those bugs that I think of as "waive a dead chicken in a bag" problem,
i.e. though my wifi connection (finally) appears relatively stable
(though not as stable as my XP machines), I have no way of knowing
exactly which of the various fixes and updates (both those related to
Vista reliability and those with no conceivable connection to the wifi
bug) was responsible for fixing the problem. Waiving the dead chicken in
a bag has worked for me for the time being. Who knows, though, whether
the next fix will undo whatever magic I have wrought up 'til now.

And, finally, I've yet to hear of anyone who has been able to fix this
problem with a router firmware upgrade. I don't doubt that there are old
routers out there that need a firmware update regardless, and I also
don't doubt that there are cheap off-brand routers out there that are out
of spec. However, these newsgroups have endless reports of people using
the latest firmware in the name-brand routers who continue to experience
this problem (and I'm one of them -- at home, I run a brand new Netgear
with the latest firmware upgrade, and still experience the "local only"
bug with my Vista Business-equipped laptop but not my XP laptop).

I repeat:

It does a tremendous disservice (and particularly to naive users seeking
assistance in these forums) to suggest "upgrade your router firmware" as
a first step in trying to solve the "local only" bug. The problem is not
the hardware. It is Vista. There are a number of software kludges,
which I've previously described, that can ameliorate the problem and
those should be tried first on any network that can support wireless
reliably on non-Vista systems.

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:26:02 -0700, "PTravel"
wrote:

My Sony Vaio SZ440 running Vista Business was severly afflicted by the
"local only" wireless bug, and nothing seemed to help -- I edited the
registry, disabled TCP/IPv6, changed the power settings, etc., yet I would
still lose internet connectivity at least several times a day, and sometimes
much more often. Some time ago, Sony put out an upgrade for its drivers --
this particular upgrade affected ONLY its nVidia graphics card and the
Realtek audio driver. For some reason, I never got around to installing
these two updates until a couple of weeks ago. Once they went in, my
wireless networking stabilized -- the "local only" bug crops only once a day
or less, though it still takes a long time to acquire DNS and DHCP settings,
they almost always go through first try, and an irritating "vanishing
wireless networks" bug that used to happen everyother day is now down to
once every two weeks.

So, Sony updates their graphics and sound drivers and my wireless under
Vista gets more reliable.

Go figure.

Windows Vista, like very Microsoft operating system, pushes the envelope, and
uses new features. Some features weren't well publicised, and aren't compatible
with network equipment. There are 3 known settings, in Vista, that may be
interesting to you. I'm not sure why upgrading audio / graphics drivers would
mitigate them, but you might want to consider these settings anyway.
# DHCP Broadcast flag.
# DHCP / APIPA timing differences.
# RWIN Auto-Tuning (aka Windows Scaling incompatibility).
http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2006/12/windows-xp-and-vista-on-lan-together.html#Connectivity
http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2006/1...l#Connectivity

--
Cheers,
Chuck, MS-MVP 2005-2007 [Windows - Networking]
http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/
Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience.
My email is AT DOT
actual address pchuck mvps org.