@rockbird wrote:
Opps I posted this to the wrong thread. here goes:
Colin, one last question on this. In visualRF, predicitve, I can show the heatmaps for 5GHz and of course 2.4 is about 3x the coverage distance. would you say that by lowering the 2.4 TX to 9 that would give about the same coverage disatance as 5GHZ?
Also, how would you go about monitoring the 2.4 usage?
I guess I could try to simulate that in VRF but wanted your input? Thxs
Lowering the 2.4ghz to 9 has nothing to do with VisualRF. I was answering your question about too much coverage. You measure too much coverage based on RF utilization. I cannot say that lowering 2.4ghz to 9 would provide the same coverage at 5ghz because there are quite a few variables at play. Also, at a high density we are not talking about coverage, we have enough coverage; we are talking about reducing contention because of too much coverage.
You would monitor 2.4ghz usage with channel utilization.
Nothing I discussed could be modeled in VisualRF.