[KLUG Members] Minimum req. signal strength.

[Adam Tauno Williams]

>>I started the signal strength meter on my GNOME panel and was checking
>>the singal strength around my house...
>Wow, cool applet!  :-)   Is it new with RH 9? 
>>So I'm curious what people find to be the minimal signal strength to
>>have a reliable connection,  and at what signal strength throughput
>>starts to noticably drop off.
>I haven't played with it for a long time, not since I first went
>wireless.  From what I can remember, it can keep up with broadband 
>until it's almost dead.

At the very corner of my block, which I'm rougly in the center of, the signal
stength on the applet varies between ~30% - 55% and occasional goes "n/a" but
never for more than an instant.  Internet browsing works but seems bursty.

>A good test IMO is to start a big download with something that tells you
>the current transfer rate (like ncftp), then go walking around and
>compare that to the signal strength.

Ah! Good idea.

>>I've studied for the HAM radio test ...
>Good, maybe you can explain this.  Do a "iwconfig" command, and compare
>it's signal strength to what the applet says, and tell me why the big
>difference?  The applet display a much higher percentage than what
>iwconfig command says.

Hrm.  I can't see a correspondance between and combination of numbers from
/proc/net/wireless or iwconfig and what the applett displays.  Odd.  I'll have
to peek at the source code and see where it is pulling the number from.

>>I haven't tried moving it around yet to see how location effect it. 
>>Will taking the time to mount it way up in the attic actually throw the
>>signal that much further? (About 15ft higher that it is now).
>Personally I'd put it in the basement to limit it's range.
>(that's where mine is now)

Yes, but I'm on much friendlier terms with my neighbors. :) We only have one
republican on my street, everybody else gets along.  And most of them can't
afford an Internet connection of any kind worth having.

>>I intend to run this open to the Internet with a VPN server between the
>>WAP/firewall segment and my own home LAN. 
>That will protect your home LAN, but may not protect you from getting
>cut off from your ISP.  From what I've been reading, "drive by spamming"
>has become a BIG problem.

I've read about that,  I'm fairly condfident that a good iptables recipe can
solve that problem.  But I'll keep an eye on it.