said by cacroll:
I see that you don't quite have a firm grasp on reality. Many people use omnidirectional antennas in their homes, because they like to move their WiFi connected computers around.
I have yet to see you admit that everybody has equal claim to the WiFi band.
So, do you want to objectively determine where your problem is?
you are right.. my grasp on reality is lacking because there is allowment for free-will to come and flaunt their lifestyle.
there is nothing stopping you from coming to my thread and flaunting your indulgence/rudeness, thus creating my disability (which i get paid for btw).
360 degree omni antennas will always and forever be sloppy.
there are alternatives that trim down the radius to a number of different degrees to fit the users needs.
i'm thinking of the hawking high-gain corner antenna, but i dont know if the rear of the thing is shielded.
everybody DOES NOT have equal claim to the wifi band, the FCC has a little thing called 'spread-spectrum' that modulates the frequency band so many more people can use it simultaneously.
you arent a very good babysitter, and i see you as the type who flaunts lackluster until it annoys the social body.
in fact, if you think ANYTHING on this planet is allocated to the consumer society without some sort of governed regulation, you would truly be off your rocker.
as far as the little FCC licensed/compliant argument goes.. the equipment has to comply with the modulation in place as to prevent massive collisions and overhead.
what might be home-made and working perfectly fine between the inventors computer and the access point does not mean that the lack of knowledge put into such an invention is keeping the rest of the airwaves organized.
as steve0 mentioned.. there are 'other very technical things' that must be adhered to when submitting hardware to become FCC compliant.
and these things must be working to the order of what the FCC has passed, whether it is the ideally optimized method or not!
such things include:
Carrier Sense Multiple Access/Collision Aviodance (CSMA/CA)
and all forms of modulation found at this link:
these are algorithms to keep the airwaves organized.
and when talking about how wifi is not purely designed to be a backhaul.. that would indicate an excessive latency in timing within the algorithm.
i am NOT stupid.. and i know that the human race has come very well along since the inception of the antenna.
i also know that any flaws in an algorithm have already been rekindled and finished (although nanoseconds count here) these algorithms may not have made it to the consumer public yet. (which is probably something those that have been CEASED AND DESISTED often say)
i went to the local newspaper and told them about what was going on (i had to pay my bill anyway) and they offered to change the channel and look into it further.
he went to check the signal levels and came back stating that my signal was excellent and that there were only about 3 people on at the moment we were talking.
i sat with the tech and we ruled out things like someone standing in front of the directional antenna (he agreed my signal strength would drop)
then i told him about the fact that their access point was up and running, and could see my adapter as well as my adapter could see the access point.
he asked what my pings were to the dhcp and i told him - the lowest i get is 3ms and usually i get about 5ms on average.. then he chuckled at how good they were, i said yeah, i know they are almost perfect.
i started going in on the fact that my link quality would significantly drop and i could not replicate something such as a phone ringing or a microwave oven in use.. basically claiming that i couldnt find any pattern whatsoever other than the drops would occur day or night.
then i mentioned about how i felt that there may be a class 4/2 felony going on.. perhaps someone with criminal intent trying to hijack packets.
i giggled and said that i felt as though someone had a directional antenna on their shoulder and was pointing it directly at my antenna (to cause interference).
i told him that if it was someone elses antenna, i felt as though that would be business infringement. and i also stated the fact that the person would then be accountable for nuisance.
after he mentioned to change the channel.. i said that would be beneficial because then i would have a chance to see if there was some serious lack of Carrier Sense Multiple Access/Collision Aviodance (CSMA/CA) going on.
which i summed up as a lack of FCC compliance on someones hardware.
i said that because the details that take place from the time you turn on the wifi adapter until it is connected and using modulation to transfer data had been reviewed by me reading articles.
i told the guy that i was down to reading white papers and i know that sometimes those white papers can be misleading on purpose.
i noted that i know of site surveys that can be costly to determine if/when/why there are electrical interference problems.
although i tried to make sure that i was clear in stating my view as there is a hardware conflict in the software, or someone was being criminally active.
(conflict in the software meaning a failing on-board chip or an improperly programmed on-board chip)
i was a little happy to hear that i would be on the same channel as the only other antenna on my scan results, because i trust that the FCC compliance will force both my antenna and the other persons antenna to compromise and therefore be organized to function as one.
i am using the connection and taking notes on any overhead that i experience.
the overhead i was seeing was simply long, and it was viewed in combination with an increase in tx/rx errors.. and although these are common and purposefully implemented to spread the spectrum, i feel as though the stalls were excessive & often lasting MUCH MUCH longer than they should (hours of detriment at a time, with spikes of appropriate link quality)
the tech said.. well maybe somebody is using up lots of bandwidth and i snapped to the already concluded and said yeah that is fine but such an issue WOULD NOT show up on my hawking wireless utility.
i didnt get a chance to say maybe a traceroute or a ping plot would show signs of steady/heavy activity on a hop before leaving the wisp's infrastructure.. but that has nothing to do with tx/rx errors being witnessed on my wireless utlity.
there is no excuse for my wireless connection being bullied for hours on end with little spikes that go towards the positive direction during these hours.
one link was a dud and i need to press the stop button the internet explorer and try again.. okay that was network overhead, maybe somebody just tried to sync with the antenna i am on and i missed my RTS/CTS packet.
yuck, i know i dont have COMPLETE understanding of what the details are when i turn my wifi adapter on and begin transfering data.. but i do have a solid gist.
not like that gist is being respected in this thread anyways.
the first post was trying to tell me that my antenna wasnt strong enough to send/receive ANYTHING FCC compliant.
the second post had a great start and then got really rude without much boundary.. i just wish the human-species average would be SOCIAL compliant.
the communication is sloppy & rude.
and cacroll, dont flatter yourself at milking me out of all that was said, because i was fully willing to share the depths of my knowledge that i have aquired thus far prior to you posting your 'triangulating techniques'
those techniques could be a lot less rude and maintain the same effectiveness for people searching for an answer.
soap-opera drama retains information simply 'falling on someones lap' when the readers just want to hear us fight and instead they learn something exceedingly useful.
personally.. i wouldnt want to feed those drama-queens with information while they are busy reading drama faster than it can be created.
and now that the recession has overcome society, there aren't the same amount of people willing to take in EVEN MORE drama by reading it on a forum.
i never have been one to like soap-operas.. i am disgusted at the arguing and rudeness.
i only use such things to keep myself in solitude while my stress factor is marginal.. because if i am stressed to the point of being weak, i dont desire to take on more burdens.
and that is how the recession got me, eheheh.
the more stressed i get, the more naive their responses become.
once i am finally choked up.. trying to be social results in an entire communicative session of responses that resemble empty algebraic variables.
therefore i am offended by your notation of having a weak grasp on reality.
you might think it is point-worthy to mention your ability to notice that i am stressed (therefore weak-grasped on reality)
but rather you added more rudeness rather than alleviate stress or remain neutral.
and i have seen many-times a situation where someone drifted away from neutrality slightly in a negative direction and got away with it because the moderators shown they are incapable of quality judgement.
my most recent event was here at dslreports unfortunately.
as far as differences go after being moved to channel 6..
my frames received successfully are at 280,000
and frames received with CRC error are at 5,000
frames dropped due to out-of-resource 0
duplicate frames received 382
frames transmitted successfully 172,000
frames retransmitted successfully 27,000
frames fail to receive ack after all retries 17
RTS frames successfully receive CTS 0 (as usual)
RTS frames fail to receive CTS 0 (as usual)
these statistics definitely have different ratios than the first ones i posted.
said by Anonymous_:
i have one illegal wifi amp Banned by FCC many years ago
made by Linksys
i was able to get 10mbps(real speed) on WiFi 11B tech
MAX power with illegal wifi amp + 7DBi High Gain
LINKSYS WIRELESS SIGNAL BOOSTER MODEL # WSB24
gave the same range as the Buffalo WHR-HP-G54 with dd-wrt firmware
i just read up on the booster you posted about, and i didnt notice any mention of amplifier gain specifications.. so i'm guessing anything 'illegal' about it was within the software on the circuit board (something about the combine circuit makes me think that the booster could be used as a locksmith for devices that require a 'signal-key'
i read a review that says there is a chip that can actively switch between two amplifiers, and i picked up that once one small gained signal has been recieved, the big amp can then boost it again and totally drop the noise-floor which would be like suspending the signal in mid-air.
if you can visualize -_-_--_-
well that is a 'signal-key'
_ being the normally boosted signal
- being the normally boosted signal hit again with another amp to further drop the noise floor.
not very important until you realize that the receiving piece of hardware can be made to communicate ONLY with devices that speak 'fluent-signal-key'
a lazy government or military would be a good reason why those 'signal-keys' havent been re-designed into something more complicated.
afterall.. the test results shown an increase in 10dBm throughout the test phase.
personally.. i got a boost of 18dBm just by fiddling with the precise location of my directional antenna.
i can simply plop the antenna down in the general direction of the access point and get -88dBm.. but if i sit and fiddle with it, hunting for an optimized signal.. i've witnessed my receive signal strength go as low as -70dBm
as of right now the receive signal is bouncing between -74 and -72.
if pay = invest / then you get what you pay for
personally i like to invest my mind into things.. and the current economy is setup for people to invest with their $
( putting my finger on feeling so 'out-of-luck' )
did i mention that other building is a firehouse ('bout 200 years old)--
windows xp home sp3
local wi-fi being offered by the daily journal (at&t)
hawking hwdn2 plugged into ULTRA self-powered usb hub