wifi question

On 19/12/2014 22:15, Martin wrote:
On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 19:25:56 +0000, Peter Crosland wrote:

On 19/12/2014 13:23, Bill Wright wrote:
Roger wrote:

It's because channels 1, 6 and 11 are the only ones that dont overlap
each other. Any of the channels in between overlap 1, 6 or 11
(whichevr 2 they are inbetween) as well as each other.

It appears to me (could be wrong) the the energy distribution is
greatest on the nominal channel, and falls off towards the edges of the
group of channels actually used. In that case it would be better to use
intermediate channels, even though there would be some overlap.

The real answer is to move to the 5Ghz Wi-Fi band. This may mean buying
a new router and Wi-Fi dongle but is well worth it in my experience if
you are in an urban area.

Until all your neighbours have done the same.


There mare many more non overlapping channels available on 5GHz. Though
there are complicated rules about using some of them, like requirement
for automatically changing to another channel if radar interference is
detected.

--

Brian Gregory (in the UK).
To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address.

Martin wrote:
On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 13:38:47 +0000, Roderick Stewart
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 10:08:26 +0100, Martin wrote:

Use a wifi repeater/amplifier in a house
where walls etc. reduce signal. Price from about £12 (Aldi) to £35 for a really
good one.
Wireless repeaters will only give half the available local speed at
best. If this is an issue, an ethernet or powerline extension to
another access point is the way to go.

Including extensions in every room and all over the garden?

I have added two strategically placed powerline gadgets and the
improvement is remarkable. Best £50 I've ever spent.

Bill

alan_m wrote:

At 11:13pm I'm detecting 32 nearby wi-fi identities.

I blame immigration.

Bill

Brian Gregory wrote:

Now this seems a bit barmy to me. Why don't wifi installers find a clear
channel, or at least a channel without complete overlap? Do wifis come
preset with channels 1, 6, and 11? Can't they be altered?

Bill

Surely this is well known.

I conducted a straw poll to test the veracity of your claim. I showed a
series of randomly-chosen test subjects a précis of my original
questions and asked them, "Did you know this?" The answers were as follows:

The postman: "My brother-in-law says wifi only works if you're on
Doncaster Road or them little streets off it. Austwood Lane, no chance."

The vicar: "I'm not sure about the specifics, but isn't it wonderful
that God in His infinite wisdom has given us these wonderful modern
inventions? Of course any little problems you might have, well, of
course they are sent to try us."

The paper boy: "Corse I know vat. Don't every ****er? ****ing 'ell!
Where's my Christmas tip by the way?"

My dad: "Yes very good. I don't know how you make it all up, but I wish
there were a few pictures. Any chance of another cuppa?"

Elsie: "Oh I hate wifi! It never works when you want it. As soon as I go
up the street it stops working. What's the good of that? Anyway, have
you heard Alice has had her hystericals taken out?"

Arabella: "Oh darling, don't ask me! I have a little man!"

Gillian: "Wifi! I won't have it! I can't have it! The waves would make
me ill! Very ill!"

My IT expert: "Nah, that's all ********. Look, this is how I find a
clear channel, with these divining rods. Never fails!"

So my conclusion is that only the paper boy knew the answers, so I
declare your claim false.

Bill












We can't all know everything.

Bill

"Martin" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 19:25:56 +0000, Peter Crosland
wrote:

On 19/12/2014 13:23, Bill Wright wrote:
Roger wrote:

It's because channels 1, 6 and 11 are the only ones
that dont overlap
each other. Any of the channels in between overlap 1, 6
or 11
(whichevr 2 they are inbetween) as well as each other.

It appears to me (could be wrong) the the energy
distribution is
greatest on the nominal channel, and falls off towards
the edges of the
group of channels actually used. In that case it would
be better to use
intermediate channels, even though there would be some
overlap.

The real answer is to move to the 5Ghz Wi-Fi band. This
may mean buying
a new router and Wi-Fi dongle but is well worth it in my
experience if
you are in an urban area.

Until all your neighbours have done the same.
--



What's the chances of two people with 'the knowledge' living
next to each other? Nah. I'd be the percentage that
understand what it is about and know how to fix it is
minuscule.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

Bill Wright wrote:

The paper boy: "Corse I know vat. Don't every ****er? ****ing 'ell!
Where's my Christmas tip by the way?"

Paper boy? You still have paper boys 'oop north?

In article ,
Norman Wells wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:

The paper boy: "Corse I know vat. Don't every ****er? ****ing 'ell!
Where's my Christmas tip by the way?"

Paper boy? You still have paper boys 'oop north?

we have them down south - actually a "boy & girl" in a car. None of this
going on a push-bike in the way my daughters did.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

Brian Gregory wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

alan_m wrote:

I have my router configured to band 4

you will partly overlap with everyone using ch2,3, 5 and 6.

Yes - meaning more than twice the chance of your packets being corrupted.

Twice the chance of half the damage, compared to being slap-bang on the
same channel as a near neighbour ...

Martin wrote:

I cam only reveive/monitor wifi on the original frequency. What do you see if
you monitor the newer frequency? Is that heading towards saturation too?

Up to now, I can't see any other 5GHz users down my street compared to a
couple of dozen on 2.4GHz, thankfully my two immediate neighbours use
ch1 and ch6, so I /would/ be OK on ch11, but I use ch13 for devices
which are 2.4GHz only, and channel 44+48 for newer devices on 5GHz.

Martin wrote:

Doesn't wifi work the same way as Ethernet does when there are collisions?

It does use CSMA/CD ... but in practice (since switching hubs
more-or-less replaced repeating hubs) Ethernet doesn't use CSMA/CD these
days.