[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: (almost solved) Re: [Feedback needed] "brcmsmac" wifi driver in testing

On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 10:07:33 +0300, Volkan YAZICI wrote:

> On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 14:53:03 +0000 (UTC), Camaleón writes:


>> Okay, let's make a brute-force test. I've removed the power cord of the
>> netbook and walked next to the AP, et voilà, now it associates fine...
>> go figure :-o
> I really liked your attitude! Go Camaleón!


I barely use wifi. I don't trust wireless transmissions for serious 
things, no unless professional devices are in place and my wifi AP is the 
one embedded into DSL modem (Thomson TG585) coming from my ISP, so you 
can imagine the can of worms that can be...


>> Grrr! If I unplug the power cord it also connects fine from the
>> original place! WTF!! I'm afraid I have another thing that requires
>> investigation.
> Hrm... It seems to be the case that power cord produces a significant
> amount of thermal noise that is propagated as interference to the WiFi
> operating at wlan0. BTW, did you say wlan0 was working in the past?

Nope, wlan0 (broadcom 4313) has never worked. I could connect one time 
but it suddenly went down again (disassociation from AP was that fast 
that I thought I had dreamed it...).
>> Well, thanks you both, Volkan and Brian, for hanging there. I will post
>> further findings I'll discover to make the connection stable but at
>> least now I have a place to start :-)
> BTW, there appears to be a significant problem with your wifi channel
> selection. That is,
> 1. There are actually 3 useable channels in the wifi spectrum: 1, 6, 11.
>    (Yep, regulations changes from country to country, but...) By
>    operating at 9th channel, you will be interfering with signals in
>    both 6th and 11th channels. Hence, prefer either 1, 6, or 11.
> 2. If you want a higher range, prefer lower channels. That is, 1st
>    channel will reach further distances compared to 11.

That's a very good idea. I will try -time permitting- to set the AP in 
another channel. Lower ones (1-6) seem to be with less interferences from 
other neighbour APs I have close to me. Will post any finding :-)



Reply to: