I will bite. How can a signal be too small to be considered a no signal? You need a certain minimum to receive data over the background noise. Anything smaller than that you want to consider no signal.
On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 3:55 PM Clive McCarthy via networkmanager-list < [email protected]> wrote: > I haven't given up in the hope that NM will make a better WiFi AP > selection. > > From what you have told me, a "supplicant", requests the NM to open a > network connection. The NM manager then selects something from the various > WiFi APs or wired connections. From what you have said so far, the NM > manager prioritizes *potential** data bandwidth* over signal strength. As > a consequence, a 5GHz signal at -100dBm wins out over a -40dBm 2.4GHz > signal, despite the fact that the 5GHz signal *one millionth* the power > of the 2.4GHz signal. > > So I began to research how much power -100dBm represents. My first thought > was to compare the power to an ant. Not a good choice since an ant can put > out 50mW, according to some people. A more useful comparison turns out to > be a bacterial flagellar motor (E. coli has them, for example). They crank > out 10⁻¹² mW which is -120dBm. So for -100dBm you need 100 E. coli. > > So the point of this? -100dBm is way too small to be considered no signal. > The edge of an acceptable signal is around the power output 100,000 E. coli. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > networkmanager-list mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list > -- Bill C Riemers, PhD, CSM, CSD, SALESFORCE CPD I Senior Software Engineer Red Hat Canada Ltd <https://www.redhat.com/> Enterprise Sales + Services (ESSA) <https://red.ht/sig>https://patents.justia.com/inventor/bill-c-riemers
_______________________________________________ networkmanager-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
