Some 2.4 GHz clients not connecting to X7-35X

@Rajesh_V, a while ago I submitted a tech dump for the issue of some 2.4Ghz clients cannot connect to any version (prod or beta) of available firmware on the X7-35X. Was a fix for that incorporated?

@Mitchell_Mitchell the support ticket and Jira issue were created based on your report, but neither support not the test team have seen this behavior. Can you send me the model number of the client that is misbehaving? We can purchase that and test,

@rajesh_v So there was no usable information in the tech dump, other than the “client failed to connect” errors? Weird.

The client is a TP-Link usb wifi adapter model TL-WN723N V3. This device works perfectly on several different Cambium WiFi6 products (XV3-8, XV2-2, XE3-4, & XE5-8) running any flavor of the v6 code. It will not connect to the X735X on any available firmware. There were a few other clients that also failed to connect, but this is the primary one I was testing with.

If you are looking in the tech dump the mac of the adapter is

|

EC:08:6B:1F:ED:92

@rajesh_v These are fairly old wireless adapters, I seriously doubt they are capable of 4 streams. But, that’s what cnMaestro is showing for them. Maybe this will help determine why they can’t connect to the X735X.

@Mitchell_Mitchell

Could you please enable debug logs “service debug wmd logging-level debug“ and share tech-support or please invite me (sta001@cambiumnetworks.com) to your account.

4 streams issues query - Please confirm if devices are upgraded to 7.1.1 Beta version. This is addressed as part of 7.1.1 release. Reference Jira: FLCN-18092 (Spatial Streams for ‘an/bgn’ client is updated to 4 instead of actual stream number)

Thank you.

@cam_tsk (Shashank) 7.1.1-b12 is running on the AP. I just uploaded another tech dump to ticket 452972

@CAM_TSK Good evening Shashank. Were you able to determine why some 2.4 clients are having issues connecting to the X735X?

@Mitchell_Mitchell

Replied via email.

@CAM_TSK Good morning Shashank. I’m not sure why you are looking at those 2 MAC addresses, those have never been reported by me as problematic and have never been part of any conversation with Cambium. However, the MAC address below is the one that was reported to Cambium tech support and here on the forum as the one that cannot connect to the X735X (see posts from September 18th).

EC:08:6B:1F:ED:92

This is the one to be focusing on.

@Mitchell_Mitchell

I have analyzed the logs, and it is clear that the client fails to send the EAPOL 4/4 frame, which results in the connection failure.

If feasible, could you please provide me access to your cloud account? This would allow me to take a packet capture and better understand the root cause of the client connection failure.

Thank you for your support.

@CAM_TSK This is interesting. I wonder why it works on all 4 different WiFi6 AP models I have but only fails on the Wifi7 AP? Strange.

If we can schedule a time to work on this I’d be happy to setup a remote session for you to capture any data you need. There will be some manual reboots and config changes needed in order to test it as I have put in a workaround for these devices to connect to other APs. Also, policy does not allow for remote access into our system unless it is being monitored by internal staff. I’m generally available from 9a to 9p Central time daily.

Just an update to anyone that may be following this thread. I worked with development for a couple of hours yesterday. We discovered that the issue is actually with any flavor of the 7.x code, not specifically with the X7-35X. We put the beta 7.x code on the WiFi 6 APs and the client could then not connect to them either. Something has changed between the 6.x and 7.x codebase that is causing the connectivity failures of various 2.4Ghz clients. Packet traces were captured and hopefully the dev team can figure out the issue soon.

1 Like

@Rajesh_V @SHASHANKA_TEJA_DATTA @CAM_TSK

Shashank/Rajesh, I see that 7.1.1 has been put in GA. Has the 2.4Ghz client connectivity issue we worked on been resolved in this release? I didn’t see it listed in the fixes or known issues section of the readme file.

@Mitchell_Mitchell
We are actively working on it.