Asus Aimesh vs AP mode (channels interference)

[dyph28]

Hello guys,

I have been silently reading this forum but now has come the time to post.
I am moving to a new home. I have a AX86u and an old AC86u.
I have been thinking about setting up ethernet backhaul Aimesh, yet I have seen that with this set-up both routers use same channels for wi-fi, which leads to channel interference and loss in throughput and stability.
Is there any way to solve this? Seems to me like a bad implementation tbh.
I guess that if this is not solvable, configuring the AC86U as an AP and planning channel placement would give me better results than Aimesh.

Thanks!

 

[bbunge]

Hello guys,

I have been silently reading this forum but now has come the time to post.
I am moving to a new home. I have a AX86u and an old AC86u.
I have been thinking about setting up ethernet backhaul Aimesh, yet I have seen that with this set-up both routers use same channels for wi-fi, which leads to channel interference and loss in throughput and stability.
Is there any way to solve this? Seems to me like a bad implementation tbh.
I guess that if this is not solvable, configuring the AC86U as an AP and planning channel placement would give me better results than Aimesh.

Thanks!

Well, I see no interference or loss of stability running an AiMesh network. Better coverage, though.

 

[dyph28]

Well, I see no interference or loss of stability running an AiMesh network. Better coverage, though.

In your scenario both routers use same channels?

 

[bbunge]

In your scenario both routers use same channels?

Yes. And same bandwidth.

 

[SteverinoLA]

But with both ax and ac routers configured in aimesh, you are limited to only ac channels so no way to use dfs channels. Same for my setup which is AX86U and AX55. I'm limited to only the channels supported by both routers.

 

[bbunge]

But with both ax and ac routers configured in aimesh, you are limited to only ac channels so no way to use dfs channels. Same for my setup which is AX86U and AX55. I'm limited to only the channels supported by both routers.

There is no such thing as AC and AX channels. I have AC clients that use all the DFS channels my router chooses.
It is true that an older router can limit the channels and bandwidth of a newer router in an AiMesh. My AC66U_B1 limited my AX86U to 80 MHz with no DFS channels.
The AC86U will work just fine with the AX86U but the WIFI bandwidth will be limited to 80 MHz. That is not a bad thing as 160 MHz can be problematic. The DFS channels will also be available.
In the long run another AX router would be a good choice.

 

[drinkingbird]

Hello guys,

I have been silently reading this forum but now has come the time to post.
I am moving to a new home. I have a AX86u and an old AC86u.
I have been thinking about setting up ethernet backhaul Aimesh, yet I have seen that with this set-up both routers use same channels for wi-fi, which leads to channel interference and loss in throughput and stability.
Is there any way to solve this? Seems to me like a bad implementation tbh.
I guess that if this is not solvable, configuring the AC86U as an AP and planning channel placement would give me better results than Aimesh.

Thanks!

If the two routers are placed properly they should coexist fine on the same channel. But if you want more flexibility, then you just configure it as a normal AP.

 

[Tech9]

I have tested this some time ago and 2x routers in AP Mode on different channels provide almost 2x aggregate throughput compared to AiMesh working on the same channels. In my test I was using 36-48 and 149-161 @80MHz in non-DFS range. Region specific though, I have both available.

 

[SteverinoLA]

There is no such thing as AC and AX channels. I have AC clients that use all the DFS channels my router chooses.
It is true that an older router can limit the channels and bandwidth of a newer router in an AiMesh. My AC66U_B1 limited my AX86U to 80 MHz with no DFS channels.
The AC86U will work just fine with the AX86U but the WIFI bandwidth will be limited to 80 MHz. That is not a bad thing as 160 MHz can be problematic. The DFS channels will also be available.
In the long run another AX router would be a good choice.

Right, that's what I meant. If I use my AX55 as AIMesh node for main AX86U router, then I can not use any of the DFS channels. I can only channels that are supported by both AX55 and AX86U.

This was NOT the case a couple years ago when I first put this system in. The limitation appeared after a firmware update. I've since switched from AIMesgh to AP node and it's much better. And I can finally see signal strengths for the AP node and other stuff you lose w/AIMesh config.

 

[drinkingbird]

I have tested this some time ago and 2x routers in AP Mode on different channels provide almost 2x aggregate throughput compared to AiMesh working on the same channels. In my test I was using 36-48 and 149-161 @80MHz in non-DFS range. Region specific though, I have both available.

Obviously depends on the user whether that is a concern or not. Many would never need to fully saturate two 80mhz channels and having the same channel actually can make roaming smoother (as long as they are spaced far enough apart, otherwise things get dirty). For those looking to double their throughput (or have more than 80mhz worth of throughput combined) definitely should opt for AP mode.

 

[Tech9]

Obviously depends on the user

There was a thread recently about Wi-Fi to Wi-Fi throughput cut in half. Clients using different channels get full throughput.

having the same channel actually can make roaming smoother

It doesn't. I use APs on different channels for years. Mostly depends on the client, but also the system (hardware, firmware, controller).

 

[drinkingbird]

There was a thread recently about Wi-Fi to Wi-Fi throughput cut in half. Clients using different channels get full throughput.

Wireless to wireless on two APs with wired backhaul of course will be better on different channels (unless the routers are so far apart they can't see each other at all). My point was just that many average users would not notice or care, I think that's what asus was going for, smoother roaming etc at the expense of raw throughput over two routers.

It doesn't. I use APs on different channels for years. Mostly depends on the client, but also the system (hardware, firmware, controller).

When I played with ubiquiti's implementation of seamless roaming (same channel, same AP MAC address, basically making it look like a single AP) it definitely was faster and more seamless, but also plenty of bugs especially if there was a good size overlap of the two signals.

It obviously depends on the client but not having to change channel when roaming should speed up the roaming a tad. These days not nearly as big of a difference as back in A/B/G.

Other than that testing a while back (which was N, not AC), I've always run different channels. Teams calls will sometimes briefly reconnect when going between APs, sometimes they stay. Never been enough of an issue for me to re-attempt the same channel (nor would I want the same channel). I'm actually down to a single AP now anyway, if I go outside for a teams call and my indoor wireless doesn't seem to be keeping up, I just switch to cellular data, but the 2.4ghz reach has been quite good.

 

[Tech9]

These days not nearly as big of a difference as back in A/B/G.

Indeed, the clients switch channels faster now.