On the ePMP series AP's, when you go to the Tools, eDetect screen and click on the AP/SMs button to detect Interferer's MAC addresses and Interferer's SSID's....... the ePMP AP's only detects interfering devices that utilize 802.11 protocol.
In many cases, there are other STRONG RF transmissions on the same channel from other vendors co-channel devices which do not utilize the 802.11 protocol. In this real world senario, eDetect never shows any of these devices on the eDetect screen.
This is quite evident, when utilizing the Spectrum Analyzer function in the those same AP's. In many cases, there are co-channel transmissions in the -60 to -70 DBm range.
Major problem......
Is there any plan to fix the firmware so that the eDetect screen will show the other interfering signals?
eDetect was specifically designed to show information about 80211 interferers, on channel. This tool is not meant to be a replacement for the Spectrum Analyzer tool. The tool is not capable of detecting non 80211 interferers as it cannot decode their becaons and provide the same kind of information as it would of an 80211 radio.
The eDetect should at least be fixed to show 802.11 devices that are not on the current channel. If we are on 2467 Mhz and are wanting to try 2427 Mhz to see if it's better or worse, we should know BEFORE we switch to it that there is an 802.11 interferer on that 2467 or not.
And there needs to be a method of running an eDetect in other widths. Showing ''no interferrers'' when we are on a 10 Mhz wide channel, and the customers router is on 20 Mhz widths... that's not a ''no interferer'' situation at all. ePMP needs to be able to detect additional widths - even if it has to disconnect, scan and then reconnect to report.
And, there needs to be a way to run a Spectrum Analyzer from the client's perspective, without having to drive to the client's home.
Yes, I agree that the fact that eDetect will only pickup interferers that are on the exact same channel and channel width makes it's usefullnes very limited... I understand the reasons why that's the case, but I would still like to see a more advanced version.
The way I would envision it working, would be that when you start eDetect on the SM, it would drop the connection for a few minutes, scan on every channel and every channel width, then after the wireless connection was re-established, the results could be viewed the same as they are now. It would also be really nice if the spectrum analyzer could be used the same way on SMs (like it can on Canopy, using the timed mode)... but I actually think an eDetect that scanned everything would be more useful, because it doesn't just tell you that there's noise there, it also gives you some idea what the noise is. Ideally of course, I'd like to have all three... eDetect as it is now, eDetect that scans everything and a spectrum analyzer that can be used remotely.
Right - and scan in 5, 10, 20, 40 Mhz widths... whatever there is. At the very least, SM's should scan in whatever they are set to, plus the whole 20 Mhz band looking for the customer's router. If their router is on 2012 @ -43 right now, that's good (essential) info to know - even if we're in 10 Mhz width.
Yes, if we're running on a 10mhz channel at 2412mhz, and the customer's router is on 2412 at a 20mhz channel, we need to know that.
But scanning in all channel widths would be best... you won't pick up any customer's router at 5mhz or 10mhz, but you will pickup the neighboring WISP's UBNT AP.
But, it's lack of ability to see what's happening from a customer site without driving to their house, that is a crazy deficit. When a customer calls and their performance has suddenly dropped off, we can't really see anything or do any diagnostics at all. It's a totally bizarre oversight really and our support people absolutely feel like they are flying blindly.
Rather than everyone starting their own individual idea/suggestion threads, if people want they could continue on one of the existing eDetect idea threads. Also, as per Cambium's instructions - KUDO THE IDEA IF YOU WANT IT TO HAPPEN.
Also, in a somewhat related note - a ''suggestion'' for the suggestion/ideas area would be to allow merging of ideas (assuming both OP's are agreeable). There are often multiple idea threads on the same basic idea and it would be beneficial to get all that discussion into the same place.