Kitz Forum
Computers & Hardware => Networking => Topic started by: Weaver on August 23, 2022, 02:40:54 AM
-
Several times recently when I have been watching a streaming movie the movie has suddenly hung. What I should have done at this point is do some pings and the like, but instead, I have tuned off the wireless i/f on my iPad and then straight back on. The fact that this has always immediately fixed the problem leads me to point the finger at one of my WAPs, although I can’t say which one. Looking at the AA clueless CQM graphs, I don’t see any interruptions in the internet link, but then such a gap could well be too short in duration to show up well. Blaming an internet outage of a certain duration makes no sense as my action by cycling the state of the WNIC always instantly cured the problem. When I mentioned this to Janet she said, "oh I have outages several times a day" and I was annoyed that she hadn’t told me so that I could investigate it and fix the problem for her. In over ten years I’ve never had a problem like this before.
If I dig around I may have a spare unused but ancient, ten years old ZyXEL WAP of the same type, buried in my hardware stores.
I suggested to Janet that now might finally be the time to swap out the WAPs for some modern kit, gigabit class or as near as is as achievable. What do you think?
Any debugging tips?
-
As you are using Apple, and it seems multiple APs, I would suggest using Apple Airport utility and scan network, showing all APs.
Article here showing how iOS devices select an AP and how to use the Airport utility to scan network:
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203068
-
I'd be looking at replacing the WAPs.
-
I'd be looking at replacing the WAPs.
With? Something from the MikroTik stable or that of a.n.other? :-\
-
With? Something from the MikroTik stable or that of a.n.other? :-\
I've got fourteen of the access points Weaver has in a box in the office, ripped out of customer premises nearly four years ago as not suitable.
I have no idea what Weavers current layout is but as the current WAPs only deliver wireless n 5ghz and the iPads and iPhones support wifi6 it maybe in his interest to upgrade.
-
My current ZyXEL WAPs, two in use, have two 802.11n radios each, so that’s four radios, and each radio is selectable 2.4GHz or 5GHz. One of the APs has one radio set to 2.4GHz 40MHz channel 1+6 and all the other radios are on 5GHz 40 MHz channels.
I’m talking to AA about supplying suitable kit for a small business, possibly Aruba. Way back in the beginning of time, I was thinking about supplying wifi to B&B guests, but Janet’s ideas regarding that changed - no need as there’s superb 4G coverage, hassle of users wanting support, doesn’t make any money - but things still might change one day.
Do ancient APs get eventually unreliable, or do they just die?
-
The components end getting frail, capacitor etc.
Aruba is lovely if you can get it.
-
Doing a WAP upgrade via wireless is going to be a bit awkward. A bit like pulling up the floorboards while you’re standing on them. I might move first one then the other old AP out of the way first, in the sense that the existing APs’ admin IPv4 addresses get shifted to a ‘secondary’/‘backup’ position. However, dealing with frequencies will be more awkward as I suppose I need to move the old WAPs’ frequencies out of the way of the new ones - what do you think?
I do think there might be an argument for changing one of the old WAPs’ SSIDs to something distinctive, so that I can control whether I’m connecting to old kit or new kit, so I could perhaps rename one of the old SSIDs to something with some suitable suffix.
With more modern hardware, will I be able to use 5 GHz channels above 100 ?
-
Yes all the way to channel 167 if required.
-
Yes all the way to channel 167 if required.
AFAIK most if not all APs only support up to 140, as they were developed before Ofcom opened up Band C for unlicensed use. As I mentioned before, my Zyxel doesn't support Band C and their excuse was that few clients support it so there was no reason to update it to do so.
The real reason I believe is as Band C was opened up quite late, they would have to pay to have the devices tested on that range (to make sure they follow regulatory requirements) and they see no return on that investment. As these are business APs and a business is going to care more about wide client compatibility so likely not use Band C.
Its a similar situation to what we had with Band B when nobody wanted to pay the cost of supporting DFS so many older devices only support 36-48.
Hopefully WiFi 7 APs will have it by default, but I doubt Apple support it right now as they didn't even add WiFi 6e to their latest devices and only support 80Mhz channel width (though strangely the WiFi applet on MacOS does occasionally incorrectly say 160Mhz).
Also, I take it you're aware of how Band B works?
https://draytek.co.uk/information/blog/ofcom-relax-the-rules-on-the-5ghz-band
On three of the allocated channels (channels 120, 124 and 128) it's considered that radar use is likely so your device must monitor for radar and wait 10 minutes with no radar detected before it can consider transmitting. This means that when you turn your AP on, you have no Wi-Fi for the first 10 minutes and every 24 hours thereafter.
DFS is not entirely reliable - it's subject to false positives (signals wrongly detected) and false negatives (signals not detected). This is partly due to the 'simple' nature of radar signals compared to Wi-Fi signals.
The effect of a false positive is that your Wi-Fi device shuts down unnecessarily, causing interruption to your connection. If that keeps happening, your connectivity becomes unusable as, once DFS has detected radar, that channel cannot be retried for 30 minutes. If there's a false negative, your device may transmit on a channel being used by radar, theoretically causing critical interference to it. There's a more detailed article on this here ( http://wifinigel.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-5ghz-problem-for-wi-fi-networks-dfs.html )
The good news, however, is that in 2020, Ofcom in the UK announced that the requirement for DFS will be removed on more channels. Specifically, frequencies in the range of 5725-5850Mhz (5.8Ghz) which correspond to channels 149, 153, 157, 161 and 165 will be allowed for indoor unlicensed use in the UK, without requiring DFS checks before or during use. Until now, these Group C channels have only been permitted for limited outdoor use in the UK, with licensing granted by Ofcom.
Note that when DFS is detected, a lot of APs will just drop to channel 36, which could explain why simply reconnecting allows it to work again. In theory it should try to switch back again after 30 minutes, but I've never seen that happen. My guess would be that some implementations consider that constantly losing WiFi for 10 minutes, every 30 minutes, would kinda be bad so don't bother trying.
-
When I tried channel 100, which was a long, long time ago, I couldn’t tell whether or not I was in the wait state or whether it just didn’t support those channels as the device seemed to have moved down to channel 64. Then there’s also the question of what Apple supports.
-
From what I recall on other forums, even the latest Apple devices do not support Band C. Although I can't verify that as for some bizarre reason Apple do not mention channels supported in their specifications.
-
...
With more modern hardware, will I be able to use 5 GHz channels above 100 ?
Yes, but if you are in a building with thick stone walls you may find it works no better, or even worse than 2.4GHz. Thick walls and 5GHz are not good bedfellows unfortunately.
-
Indeed, for reliability I'd reduce 2.4Ghz down to 20Mhz also, as the wider the width, the more prone to problems.
-
The external stone walls are between four and six feet thick, probably made of stone peat filling and then more stone. The stonework on the gable end walls is exposed downstairs. There’s also an extension built from concrete block work. The interior walls however are entirely thin woodwork. Ceilings have foil-backed plasterboard in some places. In my bedroom I can hear the downstairs and upstairs WAPs; both are very close. WAP 1 the downstairs unit transmits at 40 MHz width on 2.4 GHz channels 1+6 and in the 5 GHz band too, whereas the upstairs WAP is very close to my bedroom with just a thin wooden wall in the way of line of sight. Both of the upstairs WAP’s radios are set to the 5 GHz band. I’m thinking about moving the upstairs WAP into my bedroom itself to get rid of that thing wooden wall in the way. The guest bedroom upstairs, which is in the blockwork extension, currently gets very poor coverage and moving the upstairs WAP into my bedroom is just a fine way to make that situation much worse still. I either place the upstairs WAP more wisely in a compromise position, or I deploy a third WAP if Janet can find it in her equipment store.
-
When I tried channel 100, which was a long, long time ago, I couldn’t tell whether or not I was in the wait state or whether it just didn’t support those channels as the device seemed to have moved down to channel 64. Then there’s also the question of what Apple supports.
Apple supports on my 11, SE 2020 and SE2022.
-
Indeed, for reliability I'd reduce 2.4Ghz down to 20Mhz also, as the wider the width, the more prone to problems.
Bandwidth causes issues when you are in a signal congested area I believe. I doubt @Weaver will need to worry a lot about that.
-
Bandwidth causes issues when you are in a signal congested area I believe. I doubt @Weaver will need to worry a lot about that.
Partly, but I believe also the wider the channel width, the harder it is to maintain the connection as it gets weaker. So its faster in close range, slower further away, than a smaller channel width. I could of course be wrong about that.
I know my 5Ghz point to point link, on a bad day when attenuation is higher I sometimes have to manually drop the channel width as it performs faster with a stronger signal on a lower width.
-
I suggested to Janet that now might finally be the time to swap out the WAPs for some modern kit, gigabit class or as near as is as achievable. What do you think?
If you're considering replacing your kit, you may want to consider a Mesh system.
-
Apple supports on my 11, SE 2020 and SE2022.
@meritez - My apologies, I’m being thick: could you clarify?
-
Apple supports on my 11, SE 2020 and SE2022.
If the channel had been moved down that happens at the Access Point due to DFS detection, not the client device.
Also, did you mean it supports Band B (where channel 100 lives) or Band C (seems doubtful)?
-
3rd party devices seem an absolute lottery.
I have more than one device that cant detect my 5ghz at all, even though I am using regulated UK legal channels. My android phones are the only things that support WPA3, and most others dont even support WPA2 + 802.11w combo.
Some of these devices are from big name tech companies e.g. firetv stick and xbox. Just laziness to keep the wifi software stack updated. This is one of the reasons I dont invest in a state of the art access point as clients just cant keep up.
-
...
I have more than one device that cant detect my 5ghz at all, even though I am using regulated UK legal channels.
...
Which channel are you using as there are plenty of devices that only support the Band A channels (36 - 64).
-
3rd party devices seem an absolute lottery.
I have more than one device that cant detect my 5ghz at all, even though I am using regulated UK legal channels. My android phones are the only things that support WPA3, and most others dont even support WPA2 + 802.11w combo.
Some of these devices are from big name tech companies e.g. firetv stick and xbox. Just laziness to keep the wifi software stack updated. This is one of the reasons I dont invest in a state of the art access point as clients just cant keep up.
Amazon are the pits when it comes to WiFi support, they seem to have an American mentality about it, only channels 1-11 on 2.4 and next to nothing on 5ghz.
-
Amazon are the pits when it comes to WiFi support, they seem to have an American mentality about it, only channels 1-11 on 2.4 and next to nothing on 5ghz.
Unfortunately a lot of vendors seemed to do that (eg TP-Link, who do not have region-specific firmware) especially older hardware, which killed the EU channel usage pattern. You HAVE to use 1,6,11 or trample all over the spectrum, as channel 13 was not supported. While that may have been fixed over time, the damage was already done as all networks in range have to follow the same scheme.
What made this worse is bad implementations of auto channel selection which doesn't seem to consider channel widths at all, so would pick really idiotic channels, overlapping multiple other networks.
As for Amazon products, if I restart the firewall on pfSense, my Echo Show seems to take minutes to recover, if I reboot the Access Point I usually have to force it to reconnect manually. Its very bad at reconnecting to the Internet if there is any interruption.
-
@meritez - My apologies, I’m being thick: could you clarify?
5ghz Band C supported on iPhone 11 chipsets and upwards.
-
Is the requirement to have a radar detection delay still in place for 5GHz Group B ? (ie channels 100-140 ? )
This somewhat confusing Draytek article (https://draytek.co.uk/information/blog/ofcom-relax-the-rules-on-the-5ghz-band) mentions something about channels 52-64. I had never heard of there being any difficulties associated with those channels and just thought that the problems only arose at channel 100 and above.
-
http://wifinigel.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-5ghz-problem-for-wi-fi-networks-dfs.html
No, not all channels in the 5GHz band are subject to DFS. The channels that are exempt vary from country to country, as dictated by local regulations. In the UK/EU, channels 36, 40, 44 and 48 are not subject to DFS. However, all remaining channels are subject to DFS. In the USA, channels 36 - 48, together with 149 - 165 are exempt from DFS operation, with all remaining channels requiring DFS operation. (Check your local spectrum regulation authority for the latest information for your country).
http://wifinigel.blogspot.com/2018/05/updated-white-paper-on-license-exempt.html
5ghz channels 144 to 165 are now DFS exempt in the UK.
-
Is the requirement to have a radar detection delay still in place for 5GHz Group B ? (ie channels 100-140 ? )
This somewhat confusing Draytek article (https://draytek.co.uk/information/blog/ofcom-relax-the-rules-on-the-5ghz-band) mentions something about channels 52-64. I had never heard of there being any difficulties associated with those channels and just thought that the problems only arose at channel 100 and above.
DFS applies to channels 52-140. This is why 5Ghz was terrible for a long time as when DFS wasn't supported you literally had ONE usable 80Mhz channel.
http://wifinigel.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-5ghz-problem-for-wi-fi-networks-dfs.html
http://wifinigel.blogspot.com/2018/05/updated-white-paper-on-license-exempt.html
5ghz channels 144 to 165 are now DFS exempt in the UK.
Yes, that's Band C with very little support at the moment on clients and Access Points/Routers, sadly.
-
I read a lot of incorrect or misleading stuff way back when I first got into 5 GHz. That’s why I’ve been befuddled just now.
-
I read a lot of incorrect or misleading stuff way back when I first got into 5 GHz. That’s why I’ve been befuddled just now.
The manufacturers don't help. My Ubiquiti Litebeam (an outdoor wireless ISP/point to point link) for example says:
It is recommended to specify at least one non-DFS channel to fallback to in case of many radar events.
Thing is, only 5180-5240Mhz is non-DFS spectrum (channels are technically 5Mhz in width so thats 36-48), and AFAIK are strictly indoor use only. Yet, they let me pick those, which is in breach of regulatory requirements?
As I understand it the new rules for Band C are stricly indoor-use only as well, as it was previously licensed for outdoor use and those licenses continue to apply where its already in use. The idea being indoor use is unlikely to interfere with outdoor use.
-
Which channel are you using as there are plenty of devices that only support the Band A channels (36 - 64).
Using channel 100, I think I remember trying Band A to try and solve it though.
Problem is with my band A there is currently 11 other wifi AP's there, its very congested.
-- edit
Channel 56 was configured, so I did do it, but for some reason channel 100 was live, I restarted the wireless and its back on 56 now. Out of curiosity I will check the problem devices. (56 is no congestion, all the other APs are on the lower Band A channels). Only issue is why openwrt switched it to 100 against the configuration which was weird.
I also have my old xbox 360 slim, which cant even detect my 2.4ghz, if I manually input it, it then cannot communicate, DHCP is stuck on a 169.x and manual IP just fails. (DHCP server log reports everything fine with proper ip allocated to device).
--edit
As I was reading another kitz post, I had the openwrt wifi status window open on the left side of screen and it just switched itself back to 100, bizarre.
Is it DFS? I found this https://www.digitalairwireless.com/articles/blog/a-quick-guide-to-5ghz-in-the-uk-part-2
Ended up putting it on channel 44, with a hit on performance. But still better than 2.4ghz.
-
Amazon are the pits when it comes to WiFi support, they seem to have an American mentality about it, only channels 1-11 on 2.4 and next to nothing on 5ghz.
I agree, for a tech company this is shocking. Just seems a very lazy implementation.
-
I agree, for a tech company this is shocking. Just seems a very lazy implementation.
You expect them to pay for DFS certification? That's not how you make the big bucks. ::)
Like why the heck did they put the microphone holes on my Echo Show on the top? Its becoming less and less responsive due to dust buildup and the holes are so small the dust seems to get stuck in there. They're also angled away from the screen which surely makes voice pickup even worse, as you're more likely to be facing the unit.
Yet its still able to pickup whenever the wake word is said on TV much clearer than when I try to say it.
-
Well I guess we lucky not all tech companies have that attitude.
But I wont be buying another firetv stick if this one breaks.
-
I briefly had the FireTV 4K box, was one of the worst media player boxes I have owned, the only one I ever got so fed up of I returned it.
-
Setup some Tapo smart plugs, 2.4ghz only dont support channel 13. *shrugs shoulders*
But they do support WPA3 though.
-
Setup some Tapo smart plugs, 2.4ghz only dont support channel 13. *shrugs shoulders*
But they do support WPA3 though.
Like said before though, channel 13 is pretty much unusable as nearly everything is on 1, 6, 11. The legacy of channels originally being 22Mhz wide basically messed this up as 1,5,9,13 only became none-overlapping with 802.11g.
Do we know why channel 14 was never opened up as it would have totally solved this?
-
Like said before though, channel 13 is pretty much unusable as nearly everything is on 1, 6, 11. The legacy of channels originally being 22Mhz wide basically messed this up as 1,5,9,13 only became none-overlapping with 802.11g.
Do we know why channel 14 was never opened up as it would have totally solved this?
Spectrum already taken by:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile-satellite_service and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiodetermination-satellite_service
-
I can't find specific frequencies mentioned for Mobile Satellite Service other than well below WiFi.
Its also puzzling why Japan allows its use if it is reserved for MSS.
Then theres this https://www.wirelesshack.org/router-channel-14-the-banned-channel.html
-
Like said before though, channel 13 is pretty much unusable as nearly everything is on 1, 6, 11. The legacy of channels originally being 22Mhz wide basically messed this up as 1,5,9,13 only became none-overlapping with 802.11g.
Do we know why channel 14 was never opened up as it would have totally solved this?
My 2.4 was setup in mixed mode for WPA2/WPA3, I have temporarily dropped it back to WPA2 only when I made the channel change to see if it fixes the Xbox 360. Havent tried the 360 yet though to see if it does fix it. It is possible it might be the issue for the xbox 360, as I know on android 9 it got confused by mixed mode (fixed in android 10 and newer with native WPA3 support).
-
If you have no neighbours on 1, 6, 11, and you have a very very heavily loaded 2.4 GHz band with lots and lots of users, then I have seen it argued that the 33% increase that you gain in throughput from having 4 channels available in 1, 5, 9, 13 instead of the usual three, is worth the performance loss from frequency overlap. My WAPs can be configured to use either one or the other deployment patterns, presumably becomes relevant when the AP is doing automatic channel selection.
If you have a lot of neighbours and are crying out for more capacity in 2.4 GHz, then it would be worth getting together with all your neighbours and agreeing to at least all use the same allocation strategy, and maybe at least consider 1, 5, 9, 13.
-
I can't find specific frequencies mentioned for Mobile Satellite Service other than well below WiFi.
Its also puzzling why Japan allows its use if it is reserved for MSS.
Then theres this https://www.wirelesshack.org/router-channel-14-the-banned-channel.html
http://static.ofcom.org.uk/static/spectrum/fat.html
2.4835 - 2.5 GHz Mobile-Satellite (space-to-Earth) (Primary)
2.4835 - 2.5 GHz Mobile except aeronautical mobile (Primary)
2.4835 - 2.5 GHz Radiodetermination-Satellite (Primary)
2.4835 - 2.5 GHz Radiolocation (Secondary)
Also see the below, extract in attachment.
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/cc4baeee-63d6-11e3-ab0f-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
-
If you have no neighbours on 1, 6, 11, and you have a very very heavily loaded 2.4 GHz band with lots and lots of users, then I have seen it argued that the 33% increase that you gain in throughput from having 4 channels available in 1, 5, 9, 13 instead of the usual three, is worth the performance loss from frequency overlap. My WAPs can be configured to use either one or the other deployment patterns, presumably becomes relevant when the AP is doing automatic channel selection.
If you have a lot of neighbours and are crying out for more capacity in 2.4 GHz, then it would be worth getting together with all your neighbours and agreeing to at least all use the same allocation strategy, and maybe at least consider 1, 5, 9, 13.
There is no overlap if everyone is sticking to those channels, that's kinda the point. Problem is a lot of routers have some very weird behaviour on Auto channel selection and will pick insane numbers like channel 8, or ignore the rule of not using 40Mhz when it overlaps with other networks.
-
If you have a lot of neighbours and are crying out for more capacity in 2.4 GHz, then it would be worth getting together with all your neighbours and agreeing to at least all use the same allocation strategy, and maybe at least consider 1, 5, 9, 13.
Alternatively use the 5GHz radio in your device more, and have it steer devices to it automatically with band steering.
Others should do the same assuming they've that feature on their router, they probably do, to get as much as possible off 2.4. A few minutes perhaps to show them how if they need it.
If in a densely populated area your living space is probably a bit small. WiFi 6e is your friend.
Nothing on 2.4 besides the stuff that can't go elsewhere, likely minimal bandwidth IOT stuff. If it has 6e support use it. Everything else to 5GHz.
There shouldn't be anywhere with tons of devices people actually care about stuck on 2.4 GHz. By default many ISP routers have band steering of some sort activated out of the box and it may do this in a few ways. See attachment.
Very clever - uses the probe when clients see the SSID to assess whether they may be moved actively, if not doesn't respond to the probe or followups for 60 seconds on 2.4G, tries to encourage probing in 5G, and only then starts answering 2.4G probes.
If 802.11v is supported client is allowed to associate then is moved to 5G using 802.11v BSS Transition Management Requests.
Job done with this: should get most of the load onto 5GHz.
-
Both 2.4 and 5 are massively overcrowded with not enough channels, do you guys live in sparsely populated areas?
Right now for me.
Channel 1 8 visible AP's
Channel 6 11 visible AP's
Channel 11 6 Visible AP's - I am on here
5ghz seemingly only usable in its lowest channels due to firetv not supporting anything above channel 64. I cant use channels 52-64 I get booted off and anything over 64 doesnt work on firetv.
I assume everyone else also gets booted off in my area as I see no AP's on 52-64 but 12 AP's on 36-48.
I have just tried the Xbox360 again, it now automatically detects my 2.4, however I had to rescan 6 times, it barely sees any 2.4 AP's at all, however it still cannot communicate, DHCP log is full of discover and responses been sent, setting manual static ip it just wont communicate.
My AP is OpenWRT based, so I suspect its probably this problem.
https://forum.openwrt.org/t/xbox-360-cant-get-a-valid-ip/77682
Xbox360 is of course very old and obsolete now, I only tried to get it online to upload my saves to the cloud, for use on my Xbox Series S. So I will attach an ethernet cable.
But is a shame so many new devices restrict to very limited usable channels. I think I might start using my second AP again just for firetv so I can get my laptop and phones back on the cleaner faster noise free higher 5ghz channels.
-
Alternatively use the 5GHz radio in your device more, and have it steer devices to it automatically with band steering.
Others should do the same assuming they've that feature on their router, they probably do, to get as much as possible off 2.4. A few minutes perhaps to show them how if they need it.
If in a densely populated area your living space is probably a bit small. WiFi 6e is your friend.
Nothing on 2.4 besides the stuff that can't go elsewhere, likely minimal bandwidth IOT stuff. If it has 6e support use it. Everything else to 5GHz.
There shouldn't be anywhere with tons of devices people actually care about stuck on 2.4 GHz. By default many ISP routers have band steering of some sort activated out of the box and it may do this in a few ways. See attachment.
Very clever - uses the probe when clients see the SSID to assess whether they may be moved actively, if not doesn't respond to the probe or followups for 60 seconds on 2.4G, tries to encourage probing in 5G, and only then starts answering 2.4G probes.
If 802.11v is supported client is allowed to associate then is moved to 5G using 802.11v BSS Transition Management Requests.
Job done with this: should get most of the load onto 5GHz.
Looks interesting, usually I have different names for 2.4 vs 5 so dont need to steer and I only use 2.4 when the devices only have 2.4 support which seems to be the case on all smart devices and very old stuff like the xbox 360.
-
I intentionally keep the SSID names the same for both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz in the hope, possibly vain hope, that my Apple stations will select the best channel. Currently ‘best’ will be 2.4 GHz because of the stronger signal strength combined with the fact that currently I have 2.4 GHz channel 1/6 set to 40 MHz wide, which is ok as I have no neighbours in range, so am not concerned about being greedy. I would love to know what will happen if my 2.4 GHz channel were only 20 MHz wide, the usual recommended best practice for friendliness. Would a station seeing both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz SSIDs at similar signal strengths go for the wider channel? I could of course simply try it, but designing a really good experimental setup is hard. I’m not concerned with WAPs’ steering mechanism kicking in because of a high number of stations on a channel; the channels are very lightly used.
-
Well the Xbox360 is now functional online, I can give you an insight into the world of populated areas.
It managed to connect randomly after loads of retries, I did a speedtest and it got 200kbit/sec. Timing out whilst downloading an OS update.
I then activated the 2.4 on the second switch I have quite close to it, and it now gets about 5mbit/second and goes online first time every time. I dont expect speeds much higher then that given its 2.4 and the congestion though.
My experience tends to be the better wireless tech at equal signal strength works way faster. So if signal steering is based on signal strength only it seems like it would need a weighting system applied in favour of the 5g like what XGS mentioned.
-
Both 2.4 and 5 are massively overcrowded with not enough channels, do you guys live in sparsely populated areas?
Relatively. Modern suburban estate of detached and semi-detached properties. Not rural, not apartments or line of terraces, the bit in between. Probably on the more sparse end of the average though not a patch on Weaver.