How does this feature work: how does it decide which is best channel?
It will scan all channels and get one channels that is used less.
Thanks for the reply.
Just wondering how this differs from the ‘auto’ option… ie. how does it decide which one is used less.
Seems to work well btw, I’m just curious
The name of the function sounds good in the ears of marketing people. But the function creates, at least in the tested case in Europe, an unfavorable overlapping channel allocation.
In the tested case the channel 11 was chosen, if only the choice of channels 1, 5, 9, 13 makes sense in Europe. In countries where only 11 is allowed, such as in the USA, for example, and channels 1, 6, 11 are recommended, the channel selection of channel 11, as in the tested case, would not have been disruptive.
The only thing that helps here is that the devices are replaced by WiFi 6 devices over time, which do not have the same problem with nonsensical channel settings.
Actually I found that channel optimization feature selected all channels (4, 5, 6, 7 etc). but gravitated towards the best channel on average. I think that ‘auto’ is just the standard open wrt script that tries 1, 6, 11 quickly to see which has the fastest link.
This is preferable to me since nobody in my environment nobody is respecting the 1, 6, 11 or 1, 5, 9, 13 schemes.
I get the point you keep making about 1, 5, 9 and 13 in europe all over this forum, however in my experience most devices default to the american scheme in europe anyway and in reality wifi channel usage is just a complete shit show. You seem to conveniently ignore that all over europe people are using 1, 6, 11 without any thought and even ISP’s are using these defaults in their packaged routers.
So if we’re being pragmatic, yes you can use 1, 5, 9, 13 if you control a majority of AP’s but in reality you just have to go with the hand you’re dealt.
If there is a neighbour using channel 3 more than others who just stick to 1, 6, 11 then sometimes, channel 7 or 8 will just be better.
In these debates, everyone feels super strongly that you need to follow a scheme… in reality you don’t get to choose what is the best channel and sometimes it will be an interferring one.
So I really like the channel optimisation option because it is totally pragmatic. If people are breaking the rules there is no benefit to sticking to a scheme like 1,6,11 or 1,5,9,13. The only useful method is picking the channel with the least radio interference and co-channel interference.
It’s not a popular opinion because everyone who know’s better realises that overall this is worse for everyone. But in an environment where you don’t have control, tough shit, you just have to go with the cleanest channel, turn down the radios and to hell with following schemes.
[quote=“chromebook, post:5, topic:9349”]
In these debates, everyone feels super strongly that you need to follow a scheme… in reality you don’t get to choose what is the best channel and sometimes it will be an interferring one.[/quote]
Good values on theory:
- 1,6,11 or 1,5,9,13 depend on country ( up to channel 14 for p.e .jp)
Good value for praxis:
- configure your country in the advanced admin menu
- disable 802.11b if you dont need in the advanced admin menue
- use cannel 1, that dont have problems with 1,6,11 or 1,5,9,13 and other configurations
- configure “noscan” if you find this option to dont reduce from 40MHz to 20MHz if other WiFi around you
- use for 2,4 and 5 GHz the same name and password
“Auto” is just from openwrt settings. It depends on the wifi driver. So you never know if how it works. Some people said it just select the first available channel.
Channel optimization is active method and run only once when you click the button.
Ideally, “auto” should be “channel optimization”.