NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Solved
Upper Wi-fi Channels incorrectly using lower channels.
I'm finding there is an issue with the chosen higher wi-fi channels in European 2.4GHz band. Due to neighbours 'broadcasts' I opted to set my preferred Channel to 13, and rebooted the router. I wa...
Schumaku - Congratulations! I believe you have found the solution!
Deselecting that '20/40MHz Co-existence' checkbox has returned the information - Channel 13(P)+9(S) and the router is now correctly using Channel 13.
Many, many thanks.
We have 2 things to consider here.
First, on the wirless page is a REGION. What is that set for? Depending where the modem/router (D6400) was bought that could limit you. Look at the manual (http://www.downloads.netgear.com/files/GDC/D6400/D6400_UM_EN.pdf) starting on page 94. Look at page 95 as well, has this, "In some regions, not all channels are available."?
Secondly, this is a MODEM as well. In the US at least, and possibly everywhere, the firmware is under the control of the ISP. You can't change the f/w. Changes you can make may be limited as well. Have you contacted your ISP?
> Secondly, this is a MODEM as well. In the US at least, and possibly
> everywhere, the firmware is under the control of the ISP. You can't
> change the f/w. [...]
Not really. The firmware of a device which is (or includes) a DOCSIS
cable-TV-type modem is controlled by the ISP. A D6400 is a DSL
nodem+router, not a DOCSIS cable-TV-type modem+router.
> [...] Look at the manual [...]
Take your own advice? Look for "Update the Firmware of the Modem
Router". (Yow.)
antinode wrote:> [...] Look at the manual [...]
Take your own advice? Look for "Update the Firmware of the Modem
Router". (Yow.)I do not appreciate your snotty condescending attitude and replies. Apparently from other threads, so do others feel the same. If you can't politely reply and correct errors or omissions, keep your opinion's to yourself please.
Wild guess:
- Your router is configured to use 40 MHz or 20/40 MHz bandwidth on, so to make this happen it does combine the channels 9 and 13 when configured to 13.
- This "distance" is required because the channels on 2.4 GHz are only 5 MHz wide, using +/- 2.5 MHz from the nominal number, and are overlapping therefore.
- Information in the Web UI might be incomplete - newer Netgear routers show this in more details.
- The "primary" channel default to the lower channel, while the "secondary* is the higher one.
Schumaku - I think you may have hit upon something there.
I have checked the settings and the '20/40 MHz Co-existence' is indeed enabled, so I shall investigate that further to see if it does correct the issue, and will report back.
Thank you.
Antinode - I'm truly sorry you felt that my response was 'snotty': perhaps that might have more to do with your reading of my response than in my writing. When someone new comes to this forum it's not always easy to determine whether the respondents are 'truly knowledgeable in the art' or just those prepared to offer the equivalent of 'patent medicine' to people who have a problem getting their equipment to function correctly.
My response - to the two replies I had received (not just yourn) - was simply trying to get over the fact that I had done considerable research into this issue prior to posting the question, which had included finding out about the channels available here in the UK, as well as ensuring that my router did indeed have the very latest version of the firmware installed.
Simply suggesting I 'RTFM' and suggesting I update the firmware wasn't therefore terribly helpful. I must assume from your reply that you yourself haven't come across the same issue. I nevertheless thank you for the response you took the trouble to write.
JohnUU wrote:Antinode - I'm truly sorry you felt that my response was 'snotty': perhaps that might have more to do with your reading of my response than in my writing. When someone new comes to this forum it's not always easy to determine whether the respondents are 'truly knowledgeable in the art' or just those prepared to offer the equivalent of 'patent medicine' to people who have a problem getting their equipment to function correctly.
My response - to the two replies I had received (not just yourn) - was simply trying to get over the fact that I had done considerable research into this issue prior to posting the question, which had included finding out about the channels available here in the UK, as well as ensuring that my router did indeed have the very latest version of the firmware installed.
Simply suggesting I 'RTFM' and suggesting I update the firmware wasn't therefore terribly helpful. I must assume from your reply that you yourself haven't come across the same issue. I nevertheless thank you for the response you took the trouble to write.
JohnUU, that response was meant for me, not you. He's been like that most of the time, other's have complained about it too. Very snotty, condescending, and insulting, too many in his replies. He does seem knowledgeable though. Could do a much better job of replying and when he sees some misinformation rather than insulting the person simply correcting the wrong response and provide the proper or correct information. Not his style it seems.
