• Please go to your preferences page and make sure your "See Mature Topics" setting is set. Setting it to "Yes" means you see the Mature Topics forum (contains political and religious debates). Setting it to "No" means you do not see those threads.

cordless phones and 802.11n

Status
Not open for further replies.

audio file

Est. Contributor
Messages
203
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Little
do any of you guys have any problems with interference from cordless phones on an 802.11n network(5GHz)
 

Fire2box

Est. Contributor
Messages
10,934
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
do any of you guys have any problems with interference from cordless phones on an 802.11n network(5GHz)
The only time you should have interference is when they are on the same bandwidth like 2.4 GHz phones and 2.4 GHz wireless routers. I have a 2.4 GHz router and 5.8 GHz handsets.. the 5.8 GHz get REALLY good range. I can talk on the phone while getting the mail.. I bet I could even talk half way down the street.
 

audio file

Est. Contributor
Messages
203
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Little
the 2.4GHz half of the router works just fine and the 5.5GHz half gets interference from the 5.8GHz phones pretty bad, bad enough to slow the data rate and decrease signal range to the point where 802.11g reaches farther than the 802.11n which is supposed to have the better range of the two so I don't know what to do short of getting new phones because I've changed the channel many times with little effect
 

Fire2box

Est. Contributor
Messages
10,934
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
Looks like you may just have to get new phones.. maybe going back to corded phones is the solution.
 

ZombifiedKitty

Est. Contributor
Messages
366
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Little, Carer, Other
900Mhz spread spectrum man, I actually get twice the range with our kitchen phone over the rest of the 5.8Ghz phones. Also the 900Mhz band is virtually empty now aside from serial data modems on special equipment. Science tells us that the higher the frequency the faster data can travel however the longer the range the more the energy gets disappated. My grandpa's data device co. made wired systems for a coal mine's conveyor once and they had to run at 50Hz compared to their standard Mhz range systems since it was the only thing that could travel miles over copper wire without an amp to boost the signal. Yes it was slow but it consumed low power and ran long range. However to transmit On/Off and speed commands plus diagnostics for an automated conveyor system it worked quite well.

The higher the frequency the higher the data rate, in order to match range of older systems we have to consume more power for amps/rebroadcasters. Technically speaking different data types are not suppose to occupy the same frequencies or at least have encryption/encoding to help filter out interference.
 

recovery

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,234
Role
Other
900Mhz spread spectrum man, I actually get twice the range with our kitchen phone over the rest of the 5.8Ghz phones.
It's worth noting that US folks can only use the 900Mhz spectrum. Because in europe, 900Mhz is used for GSM cell phones and isn't license free.


Science tells us that the higher the frequency the faster data can travel however the longer the range the more the energy gets disappated.
I think you mean, the higher the bandwidth (i.e. the spectrum we are given) the higher the data transfer rate is. The propogation time isn't something to worry about on short distance wireless communications.

Not 100% sure on the power issue there. You emmit say 15mw, not how many photons a second. Sure the photons have more energy, but you emit less because of that.
The only thing I know about the Carrier so far, is how well it propgates through the enviroment. You're signal may hit a brick wall, but does it get absorbed or does it bounce? Then you'll have the advantages/issues of multipath. Kind of like an echo, more power at the receiving end. But it can be very distorted.


The higher the frequency the higher the data rate [...]
Getting there, the higher the Carrier Frequency, typically the wider that band is. (i.e. they give you more spectrum to play about it), thus, you can make use of that spectrum to acheive faster data rates.


As for the phone issue on hand. I have no idea what cordless phones are like. I just hear that the 5Ghz band isn't as "full" as it's sister 2.4Ghz, But that's mostly what I hear about wireless networks anyway. If your phone is on 5.8Ghz, Then it is sharing the same band as you n network. Because it should be written as 5.8Ghz, as that's the only ISM band that exists near 5.
It's all to do with Power I guess. Sure you can use it half way down the street, that means your phone and base station are emmiting allot of power just to work. For for your wireless network, This power is considered noise. And with your phone in use, there is allot of it.

So your SNR drops to a point where the network can't work unless you eleminate the noise. Also it's worth noting. The the network is also noise for your phone too. They are trying to compete against eachother. My advice is to buy a new phone that isn't sharing the same band. And don't get 2.4GHz either.
 

ajsco

Est. Contributor
Messages
693
Role
Private
Well think of what the speed difference is between a 900MHz processor compared to that of a 5GHz one, the speed quoted os the number or times the transistors can switch on and of per second this doesn't necessarily mean that it will operate 5.5 times faster or to 5.5 times as many things.

Just as in this case 900Mhz is the number of waves produced each second as is 5GHz, but just because there a 5.5 more waves per second produced doesn't mean that it can carry 5.5 nor can it travel 5.5 times further. In an open environment yes the increase in frequency near as makes no difference in the distance it travels, but as there are walls and appliances (such as microwaves) can reduce that distance. Your best bet would to be to get a router with an integrated phone or buy a new phone but check what frequency it operated on
 

babibear

Est. Contributor
Messages
445
Role
Private
do any of you guys have any problems with interference from cordless phones on an 802.11n network(5GHz)
I did several years ago in the 'b' era with some older 2.4GHz phones. Can't say I've had the issue though for a great while.
 

audio file

Est. Contributor
Messages
203
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Little
I'm trying to get my folks to get some 1.9GHz phones but it won't be cheap with 7 handsets and 1 base to replace so I might be relying on the 2.4Ghz spectrum for the network for a while
 

ajsco

Est. Contributor
Messages
693
Role
Private
Have you tried changing the channels of your router? The default is 11, change that may help and also reduce chances of interference with other networks.
 

ZombifiedKitty

Est. Contributor
Messages
366
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Little, Carer, Other
BT dubs UnMarth , I wasn't talking about spectrum, bandwidth or like ajsco pointed out processors. Purely radio/cable on ONE frequency, NOT spectrum. Its a matter of wavelength is all I'm saying and my tektronix O-scopes can visually prove that in a bench test with a function generator. And yes in short range it really doesn't matter, however for low power applications or 35+ mile transmition cables its another story.

GSM came and went relatively fast in the US, other countries I have no idea what the air traffic is like.

Incedently ITS A BLOODY TELEPHONE, the phone company chops the low and high vocal frequencies out making it sound like a telephone (and reducing total data to be sent). Pick a radio frequency away from what you'll be using for other devices or change your router settings should it interfere at all. Also someone should scold these cordless phone mfg's for doing something so stupid, either way it sounds the same because its an appliance.
 

audio file

Est. Contributor
Messages
203
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Little
hello, back again, how many times do I have to say 802.11n channels 36-157 I was very clear in saying 802.11n.
sorry to the people that have been helpful but others have yet to get it through their thick sculls that there is something better than 802.11a,b,and g

sorry I was so terse but I have a hard time staying online very long:pissed:
:bash:
 

covvie

Est. Contributor
Messages
60
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
802.11n can be either 2.4GHz or 5.8GHz, not just the latter. 802.11a is also 5.8GHz.

I run both 2.4GHz and 5.8GHz frequencies using a, b, g, and n, for both corporate and personal use. At home I switched my cordless system over to the DECT 6.0 spec, aka 1.9GHz. No issues at all.

Range for 5.8GHz is shorter than 2.4GHz all things being equal due to the wavelength and loss through obstacles. Corporate use that holds true, but performance is better due to less network interference from other wireless networks. Home use the range appears about the same but performance is significantly better in 5.8 due to the sheer number of adjacent 2.4 networks. Significantly more non-overlapping channels in 5.8 too so even if there were some neighbors using it easy enough to shift to another channel.

There were periodic issues when I was just running 2.4 b/g but not often. Older gen phones didn't understand the signal mechanisms wifi used so would stomp all over them. Newer gen marketed that they would not interfere with wireless networks so I'm assuming that they added some intelligence to listen for wifi signals and shift to an alternate channel. There was a recent article I ran across that now list baby monitors as the worst offenders about interfering with wireless networks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top