cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Contributor
604 Views
Message 21 of 38

Re: BT HH3 wireless issue

Simply because the HH3 guide recommends channels 1, 6 or 11, so I thought that if any neighbours were having similar problems, they would probably choose one of those channels. I therefore decided that it might be better to go for something different.

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Sage
591 Views
Message 22 of 38

Re: BT HH3 wireless issue

 


@Brian_E wrote:

Simply because the HH3 guide recommends channels 1, 6 or 11, so I thought that if any neighbours were having similar problems, they would probably choose one of those channels. I therefore decided that it might be better to go for something different.


Which, if it works, is the right thing to do.

 

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Aspiring Expert
578 Views
Message 23 of 38

Re: BT HH3 wireless issue

i disagree

 

read my post abit further back explaining why this is not necessarly better

 

here abit from it

 

If you're using Channel 1 and your neighbor is using Channel 2, you're both putting plenty of power into each other's channel. Even the best receivers have difficulty dealing with this level of "adjacent channel interference". Whatever a receiver can't understand, ends up as "noise", which can reduce performance.

On the other hand, when both your WLANs use the same channel, the CSMA/CA mechanism described earlier, as well as other Wi-Fi coordination techniques, can operate as intended. Although you both will be contending for a share of the same spectrum (and bandwidth), your requests can be coordinated for most efficient sharing. In other words, you may not get the speed you want, but you'll get reliable operation.

 

from what im finding and reading up on it seems to me alot of people dont really understand how wireless works

 

im still reading to confirm as i like as much evidence as possable

 

but u do u realise that if someone is on 6 and u r on 5 its not gonna make any differnce u dont just use a single channel if fact your signal and real world through put could be worse

 

as instead of applying the mechanisms of wireless  it would be seen as noise and downgrade the throughput

 

being on 5 u are interferring both with people on 6 and on 1 thats not very nice to your neighbours in fact some consider it bad manners or rather selfish

 

please go back and read my post and check out more info

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Sage
572 Views
Message 24 of 38

Re: BT HH3 wireless issue

I have read your post and by all means feel free to disagree.

 

You are quite right to say that it is not necessarily better you miss the point that it is not necessarily worse either.

 

Theory and lab testing obviously have a great value but as often crops up, real time testing and use in the field very often throws up different results.

 

If a channel other than the "standard" 1,6 & 11 works better for a user then he is quite right to use it.

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Aspiring Expert
563 Views
Message 25 of 38

Re: BT HH3 wireless issue

i think u missed the point that the article highlights that an adjacent channel is worse

 

and theres no point to it, your both still putting power into each others channel and reducing the effect point of the wireless mechanism to do what it was designed to do

 

i would be miffed say if 11 is bad lots on it and if im on 1 to see someone on 3, as wether i pick 1 or 6 that person will effect me, thats fact.

 

v selfish imo

 

the main thing is to find the least used channel and and that isnt necessarily  the one with for eg just one person on it

 

if that person is always streaming video then it will effect u more. if another channel has 2 people on it who hardly use it then u will getting better throughput yourself

 

finding that out is really a hassle though.

 

at present from all the expert and theory and from my own testing im going with what the article says.

 

the wireless mechanism isnt there for no reason

 

im always willing to change my mind 🙂 but so far i dont think all the effort thats gone into designing how wireless works was done for no reason

 

so we'll just have to disagree 🙂

 

 

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Contributor
560 Views
Message 26 of 38

Re: BT HH3 wireless issue

I have checked the situation with inssider and no-one else is anywhere near the channel I am using (they are either using 1 or 11), so I seem to have found a good solution. The HH3 would not connect when set to Smart mode, so it cannot be that smart.

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Sage
558 Views
Message 27 of 38

Re: BT HH3 wireless issue

 


@spar wrote:

i think u missed the point that the article highlights that an adjacent channel is worse

 

and theres no point to it, your both still putting power into each others channel and reducing the effect point of the wireless mechanism to do what it was designed to do

 

i would be miffed say if 11 is bad lots on it and if im on 1 to see someone on 3, as wether i pick 1 or 6 that person will effect me, thats fact.

 

v selfish imo

 

the main thing is to find the least used channel and and that isnt necessarily  the one with for eg just one person on it

 

Correct.

 

if that person is always streaming video then it will effect u more. if another channel has 2 people on it who hardly use it then u will getting better throughput yourself

 

finding that out is really a hassle though.

 

at present from all the expert and theory and from my own testing im going with what the article says.

 

the wireless mechanism isnt there for no reason

 

13 channels aren't there for no reason either.


 

im always willing to change my mind 🙂 but so far i dont think all the effort thats gone into designing how wireless works was done for no reason

 

so we'll just have to disagree 🙂

 

'Fraid so.Smiley Very Happy

 

 


 

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Aspiring Expert
550 Views
Message 28 of 38

Re: BT HH3 wireless issue

brian u will be getting more interfence from channel 1 and will be interfering with those on 1 if u are on 5

 

u need to look back at my post and see how wireless works

 

channel 5 is the strongest point but it will spread out over  channels 4 3. (acutally spreads a little more but is considered to have negligable negative effect so isnt shown)

 

2.4GHz_channels.png

 

 

1 spreads out over 2 3 so u are better off going on 6 if noone is on it u are gonna get the best for u and not effect others

 

even pippin will agree to that i think 😉

 

to pippin

 

i used to think oh yes lets use 13 etc

 

to clarify, its only there in uk as its free to use, goes to 14 in japan and only 11 in usa as u prob know 🙂

 

dosent change the fact it will get interfence from 11

 

channel 11 people will therefore see more noise from u and u from them if u  are on 13 rather than 11 where

 

the CSMA/CA mechanism works better from what i can gather..  i would like this prooved to me with my own eyes 🙂

 

the more u move of , for eg 13 the more its seen as noise that it cant understand and so degrades where as if on 11 it will  'do its thing' and leave u with a more stabel connection

 

the fact u mention 13 and say its not there for no reason make s me feel you dont understand the argument of why that is worse, or just think its not the case

 

i need to go out n but rf monitoring equip now and test n proove this so pippin will agree with me lol 😉

 

we could test it i suppose by setting up another access point and get it streaming on say 11 and then test main router on 11 and 13  to another pc but u would have to have v good  stuff like ixchariot to monitor drops and through put etc on both to see how they effect each other

 

if only i could then i would def know for sure then

 

if even to see if what experts say is best, compared to pippins point of view, which of course hes entitles too.

 

grrr hehe 😉

 

i think the experts and industry arent saying this for no reason 🙂

 

i dont think me n pippin are gonna agree at mo brian 🙂

 

but hope its working for u anyway while me n pippin hijack  this thread and debate it lol

 

but read up on wifi and see what u think 🙂

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Sage
542 Views
Message 29 of 38

Re: BT HH3 wireless issue

Unfortunately you are relying on old data for what you are trying to posit. Also you are not considering the new generation "N" routers which  span channels differently to what you have posted.

 

Here's a screen of my Belkin PlayMax on channel 6 set to lowest channel span.

 

and here on the higher one

 

 

Both on 20/40MHZ bandwidth.

 

In eg, 1) I don't interefere with Les's Sky connection and in 2) I don't interefere with either Les's Sky or Michael's Netgear.

 

I know the graph shows I should however we have tested it to make sure it isn't. We've tested their throughput with my wireless switched on and off and there were no noticable differences. Les is next door to me and Michael is 3 doors away.

 

I will admit the tests were done several months ago as if I am using wireless I use the higher 5GHZ N frequency as I'm the only one who has it and my cordless phones, microwave etc can't affect my connection in any way.

 

 

Both wireless connections shown are mine.

0 Ratings
Highlighted
Aspiring Expert
535 Views
Message 30 of 38

Re: BT HH3 wireless issue

im afraid we disagree again

 

its not old data at all and therefore your statement is misleading poeple, which makes me feel u are not getting it at all and shows some lack of understanding or an error was made.

 

the diagram is from the article ref below

 

http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Wireless-N_Configuration

 

and show the 2.4ghz 20mhz channels for N

 

wireless n 2.4 20mhz works on the exact same channels  showed, exactly the same channels as old g

 

they dont span differently in this situation

 

look it up to confirm

 

for the 40mhz channel bonded that u refer to for higher rates in N yes they span differently and the 40mhz is even worse for people

 

and even more selfish and bad manners, annoys me greatly people dont understand this in high density areas  🙂

 

there was call back to stop it from being certified

 

and i think its supposed to be designed that if it sees any other node to drop out of 40mhz back to 20mhz to stop channel hogging  interfence

 

its great for greenfield as in noone else around but bad for people in flats and congested areas

 

 

read up on this

 

http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Wireless-N_Configuration

 

 

However, when using 2.4GHz, using 40MHz isn't nearly as easy since the channels were already overlapped in 11b and 11g mode.

Effectively to use this feature, you will block 7–9 of the 13 channels and, of course, ch12 and ch13 aren't available in North America. So yes, it's possible that your neighbors will hate you if you turn this option on. This is why there was a lot of pushback at the end of the final IEEE 802.11n ratification to entirely ban 40Mhz in 2.4GHz. That didn't happen as 40MHz is still appropriate for some situations (ie: a warehouse) but the bottom line remains, enabling 40MHz in the 2.4GHz band isn't a good idea for dense residential areas.

 

 

 

of course if u are in 5ghz and no one else go for it on 40mhz 🙂

 

so if u are on 40mhz in 2.4mhz it will be interfering with neighbours on multiple channels, much more than single band N

 

if they are weak signals far from u then fine u might not interfere which looks like what u r seeing and u know that so it works for u

 

this would no be the case if they were closer or stronger signals, which u know 🙂 but others may not

 

others maybe blindly using 40hz without knowing thisin high density areas

 

 

nb there is some argument that in uk u can use 4 channels of course it again relies on people sticking to these channels to be good to everyone, this is for g not sure how N would be effecting ill make apresumption that it will be similar but needs backing up

 

http://www.ja.net/documents/publications/factsheets/063-overlapping-channel-problem.pdf

 

in most WiFi deployments in the UK it is sufficient to adopt the
convention of using the four non-overlapping channels (in fact, in many situations, three channels are
enough to achieve a non-overlapping topology, so an even greater buffer between adjacent cells can be
achieved). However, there are scenarios when even four channels are insufficient:
• in higher density deployments
• across multiple floors of a building
• where external interference precludes the use of one or more of the ‘usual’ channels.
In these circumstances it may prove possible to use partially-overlapping channels at the price of only
minimal overhead in terms of traffic collisions. The rule of thumb is to maximize the channel separation
between cells as much as is practical, and to be aware that once the channel separation drops below
around 25MHz (three channels-worth of buffer), you will start to experience degradation in performance.
Unfortunately, wireless deployment is something of an arcane art, and each case must be evaluated on its
merits and tested in situ to see whether the impact of the increased overlap is acceptable.
You should also bear in mind that reducing the power output of your APs is another way to decrease the
number of interfering cell boundaries,

 

also

 

http://upcommons.upc.edu/e-prints/bitstream/2117/1234/1/CrownCom07_CReady.pdf

 

this again though backs up my point there will be more interference

 

 

so far im backing up my argument with evidence and other opinions from looking it up so i win 😉 hehe 'accompanying raspberry blow sound'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 Ratings