Why so narrow band in 5ghz?

[Piotrek]

I wouldn't be surprised if channel 136 is not one of them.

128 is last channel for 80 and 160 MHz.
136 is last channel for 40 MHz (it is max 40 MHz).
Channel 140 is only for 20 MHz (it is last channel available in Poland).

 

[Tech9]

so are you suggesting me to stay in auto?

My suggestion for your region:

...or if the range is not enough and DFS is clear:

I personally use Ch.36 @80MHz in Spain, but with different equipment. The same Wi-Fi regulations region.

 

[Piotrek]

My suggestion for your region:

Looking at the WiFi Analyzer graph, I would choose 52 instead of 36.

...or if the range is not enough and DFS is clear:

or 128 instead of 100.

Personally, I leave it for about 2 weeks on the auto channel and checked what was chosen most often.

 

[Olndo Pindaro]

My suggestion for your region:

View attachment 51184

...or if the range is not enough and DFS is clear:

View attachment 51186

I personally use Ch.36 @80MHz in Spain, but with different equipment. The same Wi-Fi regulations region.

I found that 100 has more coverenge and more speed, but why not 116 that is comletely free in my house. Any difference with 100?
bye Olindo

 

[Piotrek]

I found that 100 has more coverenge

Channels 100 and above have more power in the EU.

 

[Olndo Pindaro]

128 is last channel for 80 and 160 MHz.
136 is last channel for 40 MHz (it is max 40 MHz).
Channel 140 is only for 20 MHz (it is last channel available in Poland).

Your info are very precious. You win mr.wolf price

 

[Olndo Pindaro]

Looking at the WiFi Analyzer graph, I would choose 52 instead of 36.

or 128 instead of 100.

Personally, I leave it for about 2 weeks on the auto channel and checked what was chosen most often.

if i set 120... i dont's any eternal

 

[Piotrek]

if i set 120... i dont's any eternal

Set Channel Auto (without 160 MHz) and watch what the router chooses for several days.

 

[L&LD]

Auto Channel is hardly a good/optimal use of the equipment.

Test and choose a Fixed Channel instead (24 hrs if you can) with the same clients, at the same locations, at the same orientations.

Not only will this process decisively indicate the best channel for your specific environment, but it also takes into account non-WiFi sources of interference too.

Do not use an 'app' when doing this. Not only are they not needed, but they can also affect the results you're seeing too. All you need is a notebook (paper or digital) to make good notes of the testing you're doing.

Don't test merely for maximum throughput. Your testing should include actual LAN and WAN usage (depending on your use cases), along with notes on how responsive the network is, overall.

I don't tune networks for pure speed. Rather, the lowest latency. And is what most people notice (after using their neighbor's/friend's networks, and comparing it to their own).

 

[Piotrek]

Auto Channel is hardly a good/optimal use of the equipment.

Set Channel Auto (without 160 MHz) and watch what the router chooses for several days.

I wrote to see what the router will choose, not to set "Auto" it permanently. Though leaving the "Auto" on works fine too.

24 hrs if you can

24 hours is definitely not enough for good conclusions.

All you need is a notebook (paper or digital)

Syslog is your friend

 

[L&LD]

Yes, I should have added the '+' after the 24 hours.

Auto has never worked fine in any configuration I've seen.

Syslog doesn't tell you how the client devices respond to any changes. Numbers are not the goal here. Actual improved experience is.

And the process I outline is still superior to Auto because the WiFi radios don't account for any non-WiFi interference. The process takes the whole chain from beginning to end and allows you to choose the best tradeoffs for your particular environment.

 

[Tech9]

I found that 100 has more coverenge and more speed, but why not 116 that is comletely free in my house. Any difference with 100?

I already shared with you my recommendations. You are free to try all the channels.