NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Orbi - why can't we change channels on satellites?
Wireless design best practice when installing multiple access points in an area is to have non-overlapping channels. So if you have 3 APs (RBR50, 2-RBS50) in an area, for 2.4 GHz, one AP would be cha...
The problem with auto channel assignment is radios tend to pick in between channels. In 2.4 Ghz, there are only 3 non-overlapping channels: 1, 6 and 11. If the radio picks Channels 4 and 7, there will be a lot of noise.
Wireless 101 for 2.4 Ghz is to have the two APs on the same channel spaced so the signal level from AP1 when you are standing at AP2 is under -72 dBm. Otherwise you have co-channel interference that reduces throughput.
That is not really achievable with the Orbi since the 5G backhaul would likely be too weak (5G is shorter range than 2.4G). Add in the complexity of competing wifi signals from your neighbors, and you have quite a problem. I can see the wireless networks of 12 of my neighbors.
Yes, there are only three non-overlapping channels. The question is, when 1, 6, and 11 are all already in use by neighbors, which channel makes the most sense for a router to automatically select? Pick 1, and have 100% overlap with an existing network, or pick, say, 3, which has partial overlap? With four routers all within range of each other, the optimal assignments would probably be 1, 4, 7, and 11, as those all maximize the distance between neighboring in-use channels. I used to live in an apartment where I could pick up 20-30 networks on my laptop. I don't know the breakdown of 2.4G and 5G networks, but there aren't enough channels for everyone to have a non-overlapping one, and splitting everyone between 1, 6, and 11 would result in an even worse experience than using all 11 channels. That's just the reality of modern living and a limited number of channels.
In case of neighbouring channel interference then I'd choose:
- Obviously, the channel with less received power from the neighbours. Imagine that you have many people in a room talking the same language but with low volume. The disturbance is minimal
- The channels with less load (less traffic), a network with no or little load has almost no effect on your network even if it has high received power. If you take the same example of the room with people talking the same language but not talking at all or talking very few words! :) Disturbance is minimal here again!
When you have cases of wifi congestion, even on the primary channel, thankfully some router Mfr give users the ability to power the power output of there radios so you can work in a congested wifi area and limit your wifi foot print in this kind of condition. This helps with operating of your system in a congested area. Sometimes it's just the limitation of the 2.4Ghz band and channels which is set forth by our federal workers that we have to deal with. I don't see them changing this anytime soon. :smileyfrustrated:
randomousity wrote:
Yes, there are only three non-overlapping channels. The question is, when 1, 6, and 11 are all already in use by neighbors, which channel makes the most sense for a router to automatically select? Pick 1, and have 100% overlap with an existing network, or pick, say, 3, which has partial overlap? With four routers all within range of each other, the optimal assignments would probably be 1, 4, 7, and 11, as those all maximize the distance between neighboring in-use channels. I used to live in an apartment where I could pick up 20-30 networks on my laptop. I don't know the breakdown of 2.4G and 5G networks, but there aren't enough channels for everyone to have a non-overlapping one, and splitting everyone between 1, 6, and 11 would result in an even worse experience than using all 11 channels. That's just the reality of modern living and a limited number of channels.
