2.4Ghz WiFi on a RT-AC86U - what are the optimal settings?

[sfx2000]

Also, I didn’t know preamble affected range. I thought “long” was purely extra error checking.

No - it's only there for 802.11b devices...there's no extra error checking in 802.11...the preamble is actually the client detecting the AP frames, that's all it does... ERP/HT are better at this than 11b (erp is 11g, ht is 11n)

If you like your 2.4GHz devices to fallback to 802.11b and this then impacts ERP/HT/HE modes with additional overhead, by all means, keep the preamble at long...

@Tech9 - you asked me to get involved, just saying...

 

[Tech9]

@Tech9 - you asked me to get involved, just saying...

Your input is appreciated. Thank you.

 

[sfx2000]

I know what you are saying and it's correct, but people use 2.4GHz mostly for low rate IoT devices and long vs short preamble may be the difference between working and non-working IoT device somewhere around the edges of coverage area. Long is the default and short is an option. One or the other may work better for some. There is no universal best settings.

Recall you roped me into this convo...

IoT devices - it's the low-end ESP chipsets that are a bit of a problem - that combined with the Broadcom WL drivers on the AP side...

anyways I stand with my comments here - APSD isn't a bad thing, short preambles are good, and multicast rates at 6Mbps which basically forces the basic rates to 6 and above with OFDM...

It's all good man... I have no intent to discuss who's antenna is larger here...

 

[Xboxsx4life]

If you like your 2.4GHz devices to fallback to 802.11b and this then impacts ERP/HT/HE modes with additional overhead, by all means, keep the preamble at long...

Thanks again. Really appreciate your input and expertise. No…I certainly don’t want my 2.4GHz devices to fall back. As I said, I have that band set to N-only with short preamble. Those settings combined with DTIM 1 and beacon interval at 100ms have given me fast and problem-free connectivity across all my IoT devices.

 

[Tech9]

It's all good man... I have no intent to discuss who's antenna is larger here...

As I said what you're saying is correct. Settings - it depends on what the user is looking for. You know I test things. Long preamble stabilizes low signal IoTs. It does come with performance penalty. There is no win-win situation here.

 

[JohnD5000]

What about the two beamforming settings at the bottom, enabled or disabled?

 

[Tech9]

I've never seen 802.11n 2.4GHz client with Explicit Beamforming support. Universal Beamforming is an attempt on router's side with no client interaction. It may cause issues with some clients. My advice in post #8 is to keep both Disabled for best compatibility.

 

[RMerlin]

I have no intent to discuss who's antenna is larger here...

We all know that 75% of the antennas is just empty plastic anyway

 

[RMerlin]

I've never seen 802.11n 2.4GHz client with Explicit Beamforming support.

Explicit was added with 802.11ac if I recall correctly.

 

[JohnD5000]

Explicit was added with 802.11ac if I recall correctly.

So Explicit Beamforming should be enabled? And, Universal Beamforming should be disabled?

 

[Xboxsx4life]

As Tech9 mentioned, I don't think there are any 2.4GHz devices that support explicit beamforming.

General rule (for maximum compatibility) has always been to disable all beamforming options for 2.4GHz.

For 5GHz, only enable "AC Beamforming" or "AC/AX Beamforming" (since those are officially part of the AC/AX spec) while keeping "Universal Beamforming" disabled…again, for maximum compatibility.

More info here:

Enable Beamforming On or Off - Router Guide

routerguide.net

 

[RMerlin]

As Tech9 mentioned, I don't think there are any 2.4GHz devices that support explicit beamforming

AX wifi is also supported by the 2.4 GHz band

 

[RMerlin]

So Explicit Beamforming should be enabled? And, Universal Beamforming should be disabled?

Yes

 

[Xboxsx4life]

AX wifi is also supported by the 2.4 GHz band

I know but explicit beamforming requires both AP and clients to support it. I could be wrong but I don’t think any 802.11n 2.4GHz clients support it.

 

[Tech9]

AX wifi is also supported by the 2.4 GHz band

What AX on 2.4Ghz with RT-AC86U?

 

[RMerlin]

What AX on 2.4Ghz with RT-AC86U?

I was answering to this specifically:

I don't think there are any 2.4GHz devices that support explicit beamforming.

Nothing stating it was specific to this router model.

 

[Tech9]

Speaking about 802.11n - explicit beamforming was there, but unsupported by client devices. In 802.11ac it become part of specs, but still unsupported by many client devices. It also doesn't work well with moving around clients. May help few dBm at distance to stationary clients.

 

[sfx2000]

Speaking about 802.11n - explicit beamforming was there, but unsupported by client devices. In 802.11ac it become part of specs, but still unsupported by many client devices.

The challenge with 802.11n was that there were multiple methods for explicit beamforming in the standard - this goes for both bands - each of the vendors either implemented (or not) one or more of the methods.

For 802.11ac - there is only a single method for beamforming, and it is explicit, and a pre-req for MU-MIMO... 11ax inherits this for both bands, but like 11ac - the methods are no compatible with 11n clients - but this isn't really a problem, as the current generations of both WiFi5 and WiFi6 chipsets track client capabilities on a per association ID basis...

For 2.4GHz - I'm in agreement with most that beamforming is not an essential item, and can be disabled - for both compatability as well as airtime overhead reduction.

BTW - Beamforming support is a mandatory requirement for clients in both 11ac and 11ax - so all clients can support it in those modes

 

[Tech9]

I have one Asus router running and connected some AC clients to it. This is what Wireless page reports:

Multi User BeamForming as per what I can find as description. Is this no MU-MIMO, no Beamforming or both?

 

[sfx2000]

Multi User BeamForming as per what I can find as description. Is this no MU-MIMO, no Beamforming or both?

Don't confuse the issue - Explicit Beamforming is mandatory for client stations, it is not for AP's - MU-MIMO is optional for both client and AP stations - hence the reason why Apple does not support MU-MIMO in any shape or form (which probably suggests the level of value on MU)

Also your screenshot isn't really that helpful as the internals of the Broadcom WL driver are, erm, little documented, and you have not shared your config there...