<?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 channel width in Wireless</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/channel-width/m-p/4414563#M230250</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;in 5ghz ,there is no channel overlapping so we can combine channel and make it as 40 MHZ or we can keep it as single channel also so what is rule about channel width?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;means when to combine or keep it as individual&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2021 20:25:19 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>knaik99</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-07-05T20:25:19Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>channel width</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/channel-width/m-p/4414563#M230250</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;in 5ghz ,there is no channel overlapping so we can combine channel and make it as 40 MHZ or we can keep it as single channel also so what is rule about channel width?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;means when to combine or keep it as individual&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2021 20:25:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/channel-width/m-p/4414563#M230250</guid>
      <dc:creator>knaik99</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-05T20:25:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: channel width</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/channel-width/m-p/4414564#M230251</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;what is this&amp;nbsp; no channel overlapping&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A title="Channesl" href="https://channels4cheap.com/buy-beast-tv/" target="_self"&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;ace&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2021 09:42:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/channel-width/m-p/4414564#M230251</guid>
      <dc:creator>00uwevjb1Me9s2uQc5d6</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-06-08T09:42:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: channel width</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/channel-width/m-p/4414576#M230252</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;means there is no channel interference in 5 GHz like 2.4 GHz&lt;BR /&gt;To avoid channel interference ,we use 1 ,6,11 channel in 2.4GHZ&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2021 10:24:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/channel-width/m-p/4414576#M230252</guid>
      <dc:creator>knaik99</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-06-08T10:24:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: channel width</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/channel-width/m-p/4414746#M230253</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;You combine wireless channels to increase effective bandwidth.&amp;nbsp; However, by doing so you expose such a combined channel to interference from other APs using any of the subordinate channels.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If you're in a location were you're the only user of the wireless airspace, and if you need the extra bandwidth of such channels, and all your equipment can take advantage of this, it might make sense to try it.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Personally, though, if a wireless host really "needs" that much bandwidth, I believe that perhaps such a host should use a wired connection.&amp;nbsp; Remember, even with the additional bandwidth of such combined channels, there's all the other issues, of wireless, that impact effect bandwidth.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2021 14:58:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/channel-width/m-p/4414746#M230253</guid>
      <dc:creator>Joseph W. Doherty</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-06-08T14:58:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

