4 ms·

The DFS channels have big downsides though. I don’t know much about TPC but for DFS, if your access point is on a DFS channel and it detects weather radar usage

by varenc 4y ago

The DFS channels have big downsides though. I don’t know much about TPC but for DFS, if your access point is on a DFS channel and it detects weather radar usage there it has to immediately get off it. It also has a slow start up period where it must first listen for radar traffic before transmitting. Though if you’re in an area without any radar on those bands it could be well worth it.

Reason077 4y ago
Yeah, it does increase boot time a bit while the initial scan happens. But hopefully you aren't rebooting your router too often anyway. Small price to pay for avoiding WiFi congestion if you're in a busy building/area. It's a huge performance penalty if some other nearby network is sharing your channel, so DFS is one small downside for a very big upside, IMO!
wtallis 4y ago
In the US, it's only one specific type of weather radar (TDWR), which is only used at 45 major airports. If you don't live near one of those, you only have to worry about a false positive in the radar detection feature accidentally knocking you off a DFS channel. And I know from experience that local topography sometimes means you can be operating an AP on a DFS channel only a few miles from one of those airports without ever having a problem.
- sidewndr46 4y ago
  It isn't really that simple. There are other users like satellite equipment & military radar. The military radar in particular runs anywhere they want at anytime without disclosing their actual location. The equipment itself also has false positives, which lead to much of it being unusable.
  - Reason077 4y ago
    > "The equipment itself also has false positives" This has never noticeably happened in my experience (UK). I've used DFS bands on my routers for years. It's far worse to use non-DFS bands because if you live in a built-up area they are almost always congested, causing poor performance (latency spikes, packet loss, etc).

by varenc 4y ago

Reason077 4y ago

Yeah, it does increase boot time a bit while the initial scan happens. But hopefully you aren't rebooting your router too often anyway. Small price to pay for avoiding WiFi congestion if you're in a busy building/area. It's a huge performance penalty if some other nearby network is sharing your channel, so DFS is one small downside for a very big upside, IMO!

wtallis 4y ago

In the US, it's only one specific type of weather radar (TDWR), which is only used at 45 major airports. If you don't live near one of those, you only have to worry about a false positive in the radar detection feature accidentally knocking you off a DFS channel. And I know from experience that local topography sometimes means you can be operating an AP on a DFS channel only a few miles from one of those airports without ever having a problem.

sidewndr46 4y ago
It isn't really that simple. There are other users like satellite equipment & military radar. The military radar in particular runs anywhere they want at anytime without disclosing their actual location. The equipment itself also has false positives, which lead to much of it being unusable.
- Reason077 4y ago
  > "The equipment itself also has false positives" This has never noticeably happened in my experience (UK). I've used DFS bands on my routers for years. It's far worse to use non-DFS bands because if you live in a built-up area they are almost always congested, causing poor performance (latency spikes, packet loss, etc).