cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Wi-Fi Combo

aktac_3789331
New Contributor

Hello,

I am evaluating the cypress CYW943907AEVAL1F module. And I am using the SDK version 6.0.1.5. I am using a tcp_client example and tried to connect to the Cisco AP. I am not able to connect to the AP neither in security mode nor in the open mode. I took the wireless captures and observed the basic association process also did not start. then I used the snip. scan example from the SDK to see whether the AP is updated in scan list and not seen the AP in the list. But I  was able to connect the same AP in 5 GHz with open and WPA2 security.

Moreover, Mobile devices were able to connect to the same Cisco AP in 2.4 GHz so the AP seems to be proper in connection wise.

I am attaching the captures here FYR. As per the captures, probe response was seen every time  for the probe request from the cypress module.

Can anyone please explain me this behavior.

Thanks

Akash

0 Likes
1 Solution
PriyaM_16
Moderator
Moderator

Hello,

Please add the extended params in the wiced_wifi_scan_networks() as below:

wiced_result_t wiced_wifi_scan_networks( wiced_scan_result_handler_t results_handler, void* user_data )

{

  const wiced_scan_extended_params_t extparam = { 5, 110, 110, 50 };

 

  return wiced_wifi_scan_networks_ex( results_handler, user_data, WICED_SCAN_TYPE_ACTIVE, WICED_BSS_TYPE_ANY, NULL, NULL, NULL, &extparam, WICED_STA_INTERFACE );

}

This is a workaround if you not able to scan cisco APs. The extended scan parameters overwrites the default firmware parameters with a higher value for scanning. For example: The default number of probes in firmwareis 2. This is increased to 5 through extended scam params.

View solution in original post

7 Replies
PriyaM_16
Moderator
Moderator

Hello,

Are you not able to connect/scan the AP in open mode also? Besides can you tell me the scan result? Do you see lot of other APs but not the cisco one?

0 Likes
aktac_3789331
New Contributor

Yes, I am not able to SCAN the AP in 2.4 GHz only and both in open and

secured way.

I am not able to get the 2.4 GHz Cisco AP SSID In the scan list itself.

However, with the same AP, I was able to scan and connect in 5 GHz.

Thanks

Akash

0 Likes
AxLi_1746341
Honored Contributor

I think riya wanted to know if you can scan *other* APs around or just no scan result at all.

0 Likes
aktac_3789331
New Contributor

Hello Axel,

Yes, I am able to scan and connect OTHER Aps around. As I mentioned with

the SAME ap I am able to scan and connect in 5 GHz.

And second thing is that I was able to connect the 2.4 GHz from my mobile

phone and other devices also so there should not abe the problem with the

ap used.

Thanks

Milan

On Mon 22 Oct, 2018, 7:45 PM axel.lin_1746341, <

0 Likes
PriyaM_16
Moderator
Moderator

Hello Akash,

Can you please try to scan the AP with mfg firmware? I am just trying to figure out that this is because of the firmware.

0 Likes
PriyaM_16
Moderator
Moderator

Hello,

Please add the extended params in the wiced_wifi_scan_networks() as below:

wiced_result_t wiced_wifi_scan_networks( wiced_scan_result_handler_t results_handler, void* user_data )

{

  const wiced_scan_extended_params_t extparam = { 5, 110, 110, 50 };

 

  return wiced_wifi_scan_networks_ex( results_handler, user_data, WICED_SCAN_TYPE_ACTIVE, WICED_BSS_TYPE_ANY, NULL, NULL, NULL, &extparam, WICED_STA_INTERFACE );

}

This is a workaround if you not able to scan cisco APs. The extended scan parameters overwrites the default firmware parameters with a higher value for scanning. For example: The default number of probes in firmwareis 2. This is increased to 5 through extended scam params.

View solution in original post

AxLi_1746341
Honored Contributor

riya wrote:

This is a workaround if you not able to scan cisco APs. The extended scan parameters overwrites the default firmware parameters with a higher value for scanning. For example: The default number of probes in firmwareis 2. This is increased to 5 through extended scam params.

If the workaround is just adding number of retry, this seems not correct to me.

That is similar to retry many times (without setting extparam), and it should has some chance to get scan result.

But that seems not the case in this bug report.

Anyway, this probably needs cool.milu69_3789331​ to confirm.

0 Likes