<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Clear Channel parametes  in Wireless</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/clear-channel-parametes/m-p/1222791#M186727</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;To specify the minimum receive signal strength indication (RSSI) value for packets that are received by an access point, use the config advanced 802.11 coverage rssi-threshold command.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;config advanced 802.11{a | b} coverage {data | voice} rssi-threshold rssi&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 14:27:27 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>carenas123</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-02-06T14:27:27Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Clear Channel parametes</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/clear-channel-parametes/m-p/1222790#M186726</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;On a particular place in the building we had a very low throughput on channel 1. We use the 802.11G band. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Using a sectrum analyzer we found in the middle of channel 1 a non 802.11 compliant device transmitting on a very high duty cycle. This explained our problem.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The frequency band used by the device was very narrow (a spike in the middle of channel 1) , signal strength was  around -84db ( noise level -80db)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Config is a 4404 Wireless Lan Controller and 1130 access points.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Question: Are there parameters in the WLC available to tweak this behavior, to prevent a relatively weak signal to  monopolize the band.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;A parameter like: a threshold on  RSSI, it  should be better than value X  to make the channel marked as busy. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Or is everything tight up into the 802.11 MAC en PHY specs?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I was searching for these values but unable to find. The only point where CCA was mentioned was in a Picocell environment&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards Gerrit&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 04 Jul 2021 00:05:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/clear-channel-parametes/m-p/1222790#M186726</guid>
      <dc:creator>ggcruijsen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-04T00:05:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Clear Channel parametes</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/clear-channel-parametes/m-p/1222791#M186727</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;To specify the minimum receive signal strength indication (RSSI) value for packets that are received by an access point, use the config advanced 802.11 coverage rssi-threshold command.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;config advanced 802.11{a | b} coverage {data | voice} rssi-threshold rssi&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 14:27:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/clear-channel-parametes/m-p/1222791#M186727</guid>
      <dc:creator>carenas123</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-02-06T14:27:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Clear Channel parametes</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/clear-channel-parametes/m-p/1222792#M186728</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Carenas,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What version of controller code is this command found in?  I don't see it in 4.2.112.  Is this really the same as a Clear Channel Energy Assessment, and wouldn't this induce unnecessary errors and retries anyway?  The clients would need the same value as well would they not?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 08 Feb 2009 00:19:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/clear-channel-parametes/m-p/1222792#M186728</guid>
      <dc:creator>wififofum</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-02-08T00:19:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

