Return-path: Received: from mail-pz0-f186.google.com ([209.85.222.186]:36384 "EHLO mail-pz0-f186.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760129Ab0EDSLh (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 May 2010 14:11:37 -0400 Received: by pzk16 with SMTP id 16so2043046pzk.22 for ; Tue, 04 May 2010 11:11:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4BE05F6B.3060705@lwfinger.net> References: <4BE05F6B.3060705@lwfinger.net> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 11:11:16 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Philosophical question about channel selection To: Larry Finger Cc: wireless Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Larry Finger wrote: > A question has been posed on the openSUSE wireless forum that I do not > know how to answer. > > In a given neighborhood, there are 802.11g APs at roughly the same > strength on channels 1 and 10 (yes - 10). As this configuration ensures > that there are no clear channels, what would be the best choice? As I > see it, the options are ch 1 with interference across the full channel > width, ch 6 with interference only at the upper end, or ch 11. Which > would get the best throughput? Depends on how busy those APs are :) I'd use a minstrel type algorithm to test :P Luis