That's very weird.

I would try a live USB with a different distro. If it's broken there too, it's probably a hardware issue.

Quoting: Cyba.Cowboy

Quoting: ValckTry "ping"-ing the IP address of your router first, ie.

All I got was:
PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
From 192.168.1.24 icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Unreachable

--- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 0 received, +1 errors, 100% packet loss, time 0ms
That means it's not even receiving a response from the modem / router, right?

How does that work, when my modem / router can "see" the computer connected in the Starlink app (Starlink manage their modem / router exclusively via an app, rather than via a Web-based interface)?

All that tells you is it can't find a route via IPv4 (ie. addresses that look like "123.45.67.89", aka. "dotted quad"). If it can "see" the router, that means you have a _physical_ (albeit intangible) connection, and the only possible explanation is that you do have a route via IPv6 //only//, which is clearly a misconfiguration issue. (edit: it might be intentional in some scenarios)

The logical next step would be to try "ping -6" or "traceroute -6" for IPv6 (that's these type of addresses "1234:5678:90ab:cdef::::ff", larger address space, more intimidating looking, ie. more modern);

$ man traceroute
tells us "-6" for IPv6, and "-i wlp1s0" to use the wireless interface

so give it a try with
$ traceroute -6 -i wlp1s0 the:IPv6:address:::of:your:router

or the router's DNS address, if it is supposed to have one ("fritz.box" comes to mind)
or failing that,even the DNS address of some public host like google the diagnostic DNS address
$ traceroute -6 -i wlp1s0 example.com

and it *should* give you at least *some* result, at least up to your router.

After that, it's back to configuring your routing/DNS, and that depends on what type of distro you use, and is best looked up in the documentation that comes with it.

Last edited by Valck on 14 October 2024 at 7:01 am UTC

Quoting: Cyba.CowboyThis computer has the Centrino Wireless-N 135 (rev c4) chipset... I always thought Intel generally had pretty good hardware support under Linux-based operating systems, but your theory is certainly plausible.

I might have to see if anybody else is complaining about this particular chipset online...

Your chipset is a year older than mine. It is supported by the same kernel-level driver as mine. I think it very likely that you could be experiencing the same problem.

(FYI, which is why I don't think that trying a different distro will give you a conclusive answer. If you dual booted with Windows like I do, that would give you a better answer. My chipset works flawlessly in Windows.)

Perhaps Intel's support on newer Wi-Fi chipsets is good, but from what I've seen, the support for older hardware is not that strong. Rather than asking that Intel improve the driver, most of the online comments take a more resigned tone and suggest replacing the problematic Wi-Fi chipsets instead.

That being said, if the more technically savvy commenters can come up with a solution that benefits both of us, I'm all for it!

Last edited by Caldathras on 14 October 2024 at 5:19 pm UTC

Apperantly this is a common issue for this chipset:
https://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?299700-WiFi-hardblocked
https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/centos-111/centos-7-wifi-is-not-working-intel-centrino-wireless-n-135-a-4175543308/
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000005511/wireless.html


One of the driver linked on this page is the right one. I'm still seeking which one specifically.