AWUS036AXML, AWUS036ACM and poor wifi @ 5ghz range

[bahbarnett]

Kicking things into gear with a Pi4 + wanted dual wifi adapters for 2.4ghz + 5ghz(or 6ghz, if I get ax working).

Bought AWUS036ACM, and it works great for 2.4ghz. Lots of range, happy, etc. I then found AWUS036AXML, and thought I'd give it a try. Ordered, arrived, and to my shock 5ghz range was.. pathetic. I mean, I can literally be 3 meters away and barely have any signal. 4.5 meters and the phone cannot even detect it.

Concerned, I decided to try the AWUS036ACM with 5ghz. It was better, but on the order of 0.5 meters more range.

This seems exceptionally.. strange to me.

Am currently running bullseye on the Pi, 6.1.21-v8+, and backports hostapd (which infuriatingly has no ax support compiled in for some inane reason -- a compile time switch not done). I'll be upgrading to bookworm this weekend.

That said, is this normal?! I've never bothered with 5ghz before, and I know the range is limited, but this seems incomprehensible.

Note:

• I'm rural, so houses are 100s of meters apart at a minimum
• There's no interference, and literally if I auto-channel it often fails, because it cannot find anything to compare against (I presume)
• I've tried a few 5ghz channels, 36, 144, same issue
• And, it happens with both adapters.. but just "not as much" with the ACM.

Some addition info:

wlan2 IEEE 802.11 Mode:Master Tx-Power=3 dBm
Retry short limit:7 RTS thr:off Fragment thr:off
Power Management:off

The device always claims 3dBm, and I cannot change this in any way, even lowering it. Some Googling claims that this device has an internal amp, and that this is why it reads low on the power scale from kernel side. I have no idea of the veracity of this, however.

Any thoughts? Should 5ghz be only usable if you can almost lean over, and touch the router?

[morrownr]

Hi @bahbarnett

That said, is this normal?

No.

Any thoughts?

Yes.

if I get ax working...

I have an example hostapd.conf for WiFi 6 (AX) so we can look at that. WiFi 6e (6 Ghz is another issue).

I have a Pi4B, AXML and ACM. I've had the ACM for a few years and have used it as a 5 Ghz AP a lot. There could be different things that are contributing to what you are seeing. I use the RasPiOS. I have a setup guide on the Main Menu.

The new release of the RasPiOS has a broken VNC server and I run headless which has caused me to delay getting that up to speed and testing my guide with it but I can figure something out and work with you if you are interested.

Tx-Power=3 dBm

The mt7810u and mt7921au drivers show this but it seems to be cosmetic. Need to ask why this is.

What is your country?

[bahbarnett]

Hi @bahbarnett

if I get ax working...

I have an example hostapd.conf for WiFi 6 (AX) so we can look at that. WiFi 6e (6 Ghz is another issue).

I copied from that, and disabled what wasn't working. AX didn't because no support, but once I upgrade to bookworm, I'll try with its version. And of course, download + compile if need be.

I have a Pi4B, AXML and ACM. I've had the ACM for a few years and have used it as a 5 Ghz AP a lot. There could be different things that are contributing to what you are seeing. I use the RasPiOS. I have a setup guide on the Main Menu.

I have 2.4ghz working wonderfully, so I don't think it's generic stuff. I did change my reg stuff and recompile that, but I'm going to work from a spare microsd + bookworm, and just copy my interfaces + hostadp.conf, so any munging will disappear.

The new release of the RasPiOS has a broken VNC server and I run headless which has caused me to delay getting that up to speed and testing my guide with it but I can figure something out and work with you if you are interested.

Tx-Power=3 dBm

The mt7810u and mt7921au drivers show this but it seems to be cosmetic. Need to ask why this is.

What is your country?

Canada. And I've got that set. Channels seem to match fine in wifianalyzer when I change them, so I don't think it's borking my channel config.

OK, thanks, will report back once I have bookworm.

[morrownr]

Sounds good. One thing to note since you are going to try the new Bookworm version of RasPiOS is that NetworkManager is now on by default. It will mess up your AP if you don't tell NM to disregard the wifi interface for AP or totally deactivate NM. Just a little warning before you pull your hair out. My guide has instructions near the end.

[bahbarnett]

I --purge quite a bit of stuff, and networkmanager is one of them, but thanks for the heads up.

Bookworm is now running, and I have prior functionality back. Sadly, there has been no improvement in 5ghz distance.

Wanting to try 6gz, I tried, and can now use ax in hostapd's config, but now ran into an interesting issue with your/my config file.

Management frame protection is required in 6 GHz

I googled a bit, and some people indicated certain options were required, but nothing really seemed to help. Any thoughts?

[bahbarnett]

Highlighting how horribly lame 5ghz is with either ALFA NETWORK adapters is, I dug out an older Android phone, set it as a 5ghz hotspot, and put it in the same area as my Pi + wifi dongles. It had marginally better range, and I could connect to further away, than my adapters at 5ghz. This is seriously munged. There must be something horribly wrong with these alfa devices, or .. something, because it makes zero sense.

[morrownr]

Wanting to try 6gz, I tried, and can now use ax in hostapd's config, but now ran into an interesting issue with your/my config file.

Management frame protection is required in 6 GHz

WiFi 6 (AX) can run mixed as far as security goes. WiFi 6e (6 Ghz) cannot. WPA3 is REQUIRED.

# Activate only one of the following 3 sections
#
# 1. WPA2 Personal
#wpa_key_mgmt=WPA-PSK
#
# 2. WPA2/WPA3 Transitional (mixed)
#wpa_key_mgmt=SAE WPA-PSK
#ieee80211w=1
#sae_require_mfp=1
#
# 3. WPA3 Personal (required for WiFi 6e - 6 GHz)
wpa_key_mgmt=SAE
ieee80211w=2

FYI: I have WiFi 6 working well per my example WiFi 6 hostapd.conf example but I do not have WiFi 6e working well. My WiFi 6 example has something things that are required for WiFi 6e but they are commented out currently. There are somethings I need to figure out.

There must be something horribly wrong with these alfa device

I have the Alfa adapters you are testing and several more. I'm moving slow due to health problems but want to see if I can duplicate what you are seeing, I also have additional adapters based on the same chipsets and an old cel phone or two. Let me see what I can come up with.

Nick

[morrownr]

@bahbarnett

Yesterday, I reconfigured my PI4B with my Alfa ACM. I'm using the previous version of the RasPiOS as I run headless and the VNC server is broken in the latest RasPiOS.

The results over the last day:

• System used as client: intel i7, this is my main dev box.
• Signal level is 40 dBm.
• Link quality is 99%.
• Distance: 10 meters.
• Obstructions: 2 walls.
• Signal is within 5% of the signal of my main wifi router which is a very good AP.

Very stable connect. iperf3 shows a relatively consistent 275 Mbps which is not bad at all for being on channel 36 which is a somewhat busy channel.

Later today, I will do tests with a system in my lab. Distance will be around 18 meters with 4 walls in the line of site. I'll also check similar adapters with mt7612u and rtl8812bu chipsets to see how they compare. So far, I'd have to give the ACM a good grade. I'm not saying you are not seeing what you are seeing, I'm simply looking for myself and reporting the results.

Cheers

[bahbarnett]

Hmm. I've been trying to get onto 6ghz, in case my 5ghz issues are band related noise. It doesn't make much sense, I am rural, and there's nothing near by, but I figure it's a good attempt at a debug.

However, no matter what I do.. I can't get hostapd configs to actually show up at 6ghz on my phones. Both are supposed to be capable of 6e. Hostapd happily starts, and that can be a struggle if you have a tiny issue with correct config, so I presume the config is OK?

Yet, the AP simply never appears. Here's one example config, which does start:

interface=wlan1
bridge=br0
country_code=CA
logger_syslog=1
logger_syslog_level=0
logger_stdout=1
logger_stdout_level=0
ctrl_interface=/var/run/hostapd
ctrl_interface_group=0
ssid=morealiens
hw_mode=a
channel=1
op_class=131
preamble=0
macaddr_acl=0
auth_algs=3
ignore_broadcast_ssid=0
ap_isolate=0
broadcast_deauth=0
ieee80211ax=1
he_oper_centr_freq_seg0_idx=15
#he_6ghz_reg_pwr_type=0
eapol_key_index_workaround=0
eap_server=0
own_ip_addr=127.0.0.1
wpa=2
wpa_passphrase=secretpwd
wpa_psk_radius=0
wpa_key_mgmt=SAE
rsn_pairwise=CCMP
group_cipher=CCMP
wpa_group_rekey=1800
rsn_preauth=1
ieee80211w=2
group_mgmt_cipher=AES-128-CMAC
assoc_sa_query_max_timeout=10000
sae_pwe=2
stationary_ap=1

You say you're having issues with 6e.. but I was wondering, do you have a config which actually shows the hotspot on your devices?

[bahbarnett]

OK... one piece of the puzzle.

I have a US phone with a US sim card. I'm in Canada. This made me think, what if the phone can't see the 6ghz channels, because the SIM card, setting the reg domain for the phone, sets it to US (naturally).. and those channels are a no-go in the US?

The prior post config can easily set (for example) the channel above with CA, but when I try with US, it says:

Frequency 6415 (primary) not allowed for AP mode, flags: 0x10003 NO-IR
Primary frequency not allowed

This seems to be the case for all frequencies with this adapter?!

nl80211: Mode IEEE 802.11a: 5955[NO_IR] 5975[NO_IR] 5995[NO_IR] 6015[NO_IR] 6035[NO_IR] 6055[NO_IR] 6075[NO_IR] 6095[NO_IR] 6115[NO_IR] 6135[NO_IR] 6155[NO_IR] 6175[NO_IR] 6195[NO_IR] 6215[NO_IR] 6235[NO_IR] 6255[NO_IR]

With CA as the region:

nl80211: Mode IEEE 802.11a: 5955 5975 5995 6015 6035 6055 6075 6095 6115 6135 6155 6175 6195 6215 6235 6255 6275 6295 6315 6335 6355 6375 6395 6415 6435 6455 6475 6495 6515 6535 6555 6575 6595 6615 6635 6655 6675 6695 6715

Not only am I not beset with NO_IR, I have a much nicer channel range. What?!

This seems quite bizarre. I cannot seem to detect, via Google, a complete lack of 6ghz support in the US. And idea why this is the case?

Weird. I just checked the reg db (plan to recompile), and that's.. normal for the US?!

# 6g band
# https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/05/26/2020-11236/unlicensed-use-of-the-6ghz-band
(5925 - 7125 @ 320), (12), NO-OUTDOOR, NO-IR

Here's what I don't get. OK. So in the US 6ghz isn't allowed I suppose without licensing, but it is OK in Canada. However, there are different frequencies. Still.. I've picked channel 49, which is 6195, and even though I have NO_IR, I should be able to see that on my Android device? Because in the US reg db, that frequency is OK, except NO_IR is for AP, not clients?!

But that still shows nothing on my devices.

[morrownr]

Hi @bahbarnett

You have a lot of info for me to process. I have mostly concentrated my efforts on WiFi 6 over the last year because very few users (and me) had WiFi 6e (6 Ghz) capability. It is probably time for me to look at this again but I can pass on some things that others have talked about here.

The 6 Ghz testing I did was with OpenWRT on a WiFi router that has a usb3 port. This was with OpenWRT 23.05 testing once it got to the point that it should have been able to support 6 Ghz. It would not allow 6 Ghz channels with US set as country code so I tried FR and DE as some users here said that is what they had to do. Only the lower channels work as that is all that is approved in the EU. It appeared to work but at the time I only had one adapter with the mt7921au chipset and I was using it as the AP so I cannot say if it really worked for sure. I do have a second adapter now and even a mt7922 based PCIe card so I can test.

Something interesting that I saw posted to linux-wireless last week might have something to do with 6 Ghz AP mode and the US. It was support for the 3 different 6 Ghz power levels defined in the US. I'm not sure how that fits into this but i remember looking at the regdb for the US at some point last year and I wondered how some things would be determined.

I'll try to work this into my testing soon. We can see where this goes. Maybe someone else will come along and tell us what to do.

Nick

[bahbarnett]

Tried updating the firmware, tried setting the reg domain in the module, I get this when I start hostapd:

Completing interface initialization
Mode: IEEE 802.11a Channel: 1 Frequency: 5955 MHz
nl80211: Set freq 5955 (ht_enabled=0, vht_enabled=0, he_enabled=1, bandwidth=160 MHz, cf1=6025 MHz, cf2=0 MHz)

• freq=5955
• he_enabled=1
• vht_enabled=0
• ht_enabled=0
• bandwidth=160
• channel_width=5
• center_freq1=6025
• center_freq2=0

But... never shows on any device I own.

Both my android devices support 6e, according to the manufacturer, and have up to date firmwares.

I don't get it. Problem is, I don't know anyone with 6e. So I don't know if my phones really work with 6e (due to US SIM cards, and US phones, perhaps limited on 6e?, even though I'm in Canada).

Do you know if your phones work with 6e? Have you ever connected to such a spot? I feel we're going to go crazy, if we can't verify one end works.

EDIT: both my phones do 6, only one does 6e. But I am testing with the 6e phone + wifi analyzer.

[morrownr]

@bahbarnett

bandwidth=160 MHz,

The mt7921au chipset is not capable of 160 Mhz so you have a setting to fix. It can do 80 Mhz.

The to be release mt7925 chipset will have 160 Mhz and will be released in a usb version. The driver is going into kernel 6.7. The mt7925 chipset is WiFi 7. No adapters are available at this point.

Problem is, I don't know anyone with 6e.

I understand. This is the reason I have been concentrating on getting an example host.conf ready for WiFi 6 as my ability to test WiFi 6e has mostly not been there and I don't have any phone or other clients that have the capability. I would not mind getting a new WiFi 6e WiFi router but I have yet to find one to buy as I am very picky. I have to see how well they work with OpenWRT before I buy and we are not there yet.

[morrownr]

@bahbarnett

After you fix the 160 Mhz thing, can I get you to post the hostapd.conf you are using. All it takes is one bad setting to mess things up.

[bahbarnett]

Wow. I did not catch that. And worse, neither did hostapd, arg. Thanks. Arg. Double thanks.

And guess what! I can see it now!

Here's my config, after trying 1000 things to get to this point.

interface=wlan1
bridge=br0
country_code=CA

logger_syslog=-1
logger_syslog_level=1
#logger_syslog=1
#logger_syslog_level=0
#logger_stdout=1
#logger_stdout_level=0
ctrl_interface=/var/run/hostapd
ctrl_interface_group=0
ssid=morealiens
hw_mode=a

driver=nl80211

# Set the channel to use. If 0 (ACS), channel will be automatically selected
#channel=44

# IEEE 802.11i, only WPA3 encryption with SAE authentication
ieee80211w=2

# IEEE 802.11n (Wi-Fi 4) features
ieee80211n=1
ht_capab=[HT20][HT40+][HT40-][SHORT-GI-20][SHORT-GI-40]

# IEEE 802.11ac (Wi-Fi 5) features
ieee80211ac=1
vht_oper_chwidth=1
vht_capab=[SHORT-GI-80]

# IEEE 802.11ax (Wi-Fi 6) features
ieee80211ax=1
he_su_beamformer=1
he_su_beamformee=1


channel=37
op_class=133
#eapol_key_index_workaround=0
wpa=2
wpa_passphrase=morealiens
wpa_key_mgmt=SAE
rsn_pairwise=CCMP
#group_cipher=CCMP
#group_mgmt_cipher=AES-128-CMAC

Weird thing. I first tried with 131, and it stated:

Mode: IEEE 802.11a  Channel: 37  Frequency: 6135 MHz
nl80211: Set freq 6135 (ht_enabled=0, vht_enabled=0, he_enabled=1, bandwidth=40 MHz, cf1=6145 MHz, cf2=0 MHz)
  * freq=6135
  * he_enabled=1
  * vht_enabled=0
  * ht_enabled=0
  * bandwidth=40
  * channel_width=2
  * center_freq1=6145
  * center_freq2=0

Then I tried with 133, and it stated:

nl80211: Set freq 6135 (ht_enabled=0, vht_enabled=0, he_enabled=1, bandwidth=80 MHz, cf1=6145 MHz, cf2=0 MHz)
  * freq=6135
  * he_enabled=1
  * vht_enabled=0
  * ht_enabled=0
  * bandwidth=80
  * channel_width=3
  * center_freq1=6145
  * center_freq2=0

Yet the phone still saw it as 20mhz wide??

And while the phone can see the AP, and tries to connect, it always claims "incorrect password".

[bahbarnett]

Huh.

Wondering what was up with the password thing, I enabled WPA2 on my 2.4 config:

wpa=1
auth_algs=1
#preamble=1

#wpa_psk=XXX
wpa_passphrase=morealiens
wpa_key_mgmt=WPA-PSK
wpa_pairwise=TKIP
rsn_pairwise=CCMP
macaddr_acl=0

Works fine, I can connect. (I tend to not use passwords, because I want open APs, I'm on rural land here, and yeah I know I'll need them for 6/6e).

But there is a lag in connecting. And, when I purposefully use a bad password, there is a lag and:

wlan1: STA MACADDRESS IEEE 802.11: authenticated
wlan1: STA MACADDRESS IEEE 802.11: associated (aid 1)
wlan1: AP-STA-POSSIBLE-PSK-MISMATCH MACADDRESS
wlan1: AP-STA-POSSIBLE-PSK-MISMATCH MACADDRESS
wlan1: AP-STA-POSSIBLE-PSK-MISMATCH MACADDRESS
wlan1: AP-STA-POSSIBLE-PSK-MISMATCH MACADDRESS
wlan1: STA MACADDRESS IEEE 802.11: deauthenticated due to local deauth request

And of course a:

wlan1: AP-STA-CONNECTED MACADDRESS

With a good pass.

However!

When doing the whole WPA3 thing, there is nothing happening in the logs for hostapd. No mention of anything, and my phone instantly rejects the password. It's like it's not trying?

Any thoughts sir?

[morrownr]

I'm reluctant to go to bleeding edge with hostapd, unless necessary. I am worried about stability.

My experience is that hostapd really doesn't seem to have what we think of as a bleeding edge as it has been around for a long time and it is used by a lot of organizations and it goes into products that have to be solid. Many APs/WiFi routers that are on the market use hostapd.

With hostapd, compiling to the current repo is done for 2 reasons. 1. To get the latest code that may have features that are needed and 2. To make sure all of the needed features are turned on during compilation. I think I saw the other day where a guy with the new RasPiOS had to compile hostapd because not everything he needed had been compiled in. I have a guide on the Main Menu:

https://github.com/morrownr/USB-WiFi/blob/main/home/AP_Mode/Upgrade_hostapd.md

I probably need to recheck to make sure the features listed in the guide are accurate. You really keep me busy. The reason that hostapd breaks down all the parts and you can compile what you need is that the products that it goes into generally have very limited storage for programs so it needs to be as small as it possible can be.

How about we look at antennas when we get it going. I'm working on this also. Right now, everything seems to be setup the way I think it should be but I have little experience with 6 Ghz. I need to do some research. Keep in mind that we are on the bleeding edge as I am not aware of any guides to do this there will be some bumps in the road. It took me a while get the WiFi 6 guide working well. This WiFi 6e is much more complicated.

Nick

[bahbarnett]

I'm looking at both the debian package, and your guide, and the defaults (just doing diffs, and reading). I'm curious about Debian choices, and what's change between my installed deb, and the new version, and your changes.

That said, I started playing with 2.4ghz and ax. Supposedly I should get a big bandwidth boost, but I can't seem to activate that. It laughs at my channel choice, mocks me relentlessly. And 2.4ghz has much greater power, and range. You may wonder why I'd not care for 5ghz, or 6, but there is no congestion here at all. If any AP points show on wifianalyzer, they're just barely visible, zero bars, and they vanish in seconds.

I'm thinking that for many people, 2.4ghz might be a far better choice for range. What do you think?

NOTE: thanks for you help btw, but don't stress please. This is not an emergency, and hopefully we can validate 6e. The antennas are from Amazon, so free returns, so I'm not worried if they provide no additional distance, I can return them. And again -- rural, so I'm happy to be able to walk further from my house when outside. There's no loss.

[morrownr]

I'm looking at both the debian package, and your guide, and the defaults (just doing diffs, and reading). I'm curious about Debian choices, and what's change between my installed deb, and the new version, and your changes.

Are you talking about the diff between the Debian .config and my suggested ,config?

Also, have you run:

$ hostapd -v

I'm thinking that for many people, 2.4ghz might be a far better choice for range. What do you think?

For those looking for the best range, 2.4 Ghz is going to give the best range. In your case, since there is little to no congestion to deal with, it is the band go with as the primary. I am not rural but congestion is not bad at all. The band that supports the home is 2.4 Ghz. I have 2 Roku tv devices that stream FHD, some IoT devices and our phones use 2.4 Ghz as well. I can have as much as I can going and 2.4 Ghz still takes care of it fine. I have tested and mt 2.4 Ghz ap can provide 200 Mbps or more consistently, which is much more than needed. I use 5 Ghz for things like my lan which can make use of the bigger pipe. The main 5 Ghz ap is using an unused DFS channel and I see throughput of 650-800 Mbps.

I actually have the txpower set to medium for the 2.4 Ghz ap as the range is well beyond what I need for the home and backyard so why interfere with others unnecessarily?

There is a big drop off between 2.4 and 5 and another dropoff from 5 to 6 that is almost as big. 2.4 Ghz is not going away. When you range and the congestion is low on 2.4 Ghz, that is where to be. Since this came up, I have been testing 2.4 Ghz AX and it does well.

Holy cow! I just checked and I am connected to my 6 Ghz ap that I am working on for this project. I guess I need to check my settings and update what I have put up so far. This is with OpenWRT and my axml. I need to start testing my Pi4B with the hostpad.conf I posted so maybe we can get to the bottom of this.

Recommend you continue investigating the .config for hostpad and do a compile per my guide. Hopefully we can update my guide with any good stuff you figure out.

Nick

[bahbarnett]

Yes, just curious what the different defaults are.

libnl-route-3-dev seems to be needed, not sure if that's a bookworm thing.

Outside of that, here's my attempt at 2.4ghz 6e:

ssid=morealiens
interface=wlan1
hw_mode=g
channel=6
bridge=br0
#

country_code=CA
ieee80211d=1
ieee80211n=1
wmm_enabled=1

driver=nl80211

# Various settings
#beacon_int=100
#dtim_period=2
#max_num_sta=32
#rts_threshold=2347
#fragm_threshold=2346
#send_probe_response=1

logger_syslog=-1
logger_syslog_level=1

wpa=2
wpa_pairwise=CCMP CCMP-256
wpa_key_mgmt=SAE WPA-PSK
ieee80211w=1
ieee80211ax=1

auth_algs=1
preamble=1

#wpa_psk=XXX
wpa_passphrase=morealiens
macaddr_acl=0

# pulled from https://github.com/morrownr/USB-WiFi/blob/main/home/AP_Mode/hostapd-WiFi4.conf
# Mediatek chipsets
# mt7612u - mt7610u
# using both + and - makes no sense
#ht_capab=[HT40+][HT40-][GF][SHORT-GI-20][SHORT-GI-40]
#ht_capab=[HT40-][GF][SHORT-GI-20][SHORT-GI-40]
###ht_capab=[GF][SHORT-GI-20]

# mt7921au  (HT capabilities 0x9ff)
ht_capab=[HT40+][LDPC][SHORT-GI-20][SHORT-GI-40][TX-STBC][RX-STBC1][MAX-AMSDU-7935]


ctrl_interface=/var/run/hostapd
ctrl_interface_group=0

Yet, I seem limited to 229Mbps with this. My phones do now show a little '6' on the wifi icon, though.

Shouldn't I be ... 4x that?!

nl80211: Set freq 2437 (ht_enabled=1, vht_enabled=0, he_enabled=1, eht_enabled=0, bandwidth=40 MHz, cf1=2447 MHz, cf2=0 MHz)
  * freq=2437
  * eht_enabled=0
  * he_enabled=1
  * vht_enabled=0
  * ht_enabled=1
  * radar_background=0
  * sec_channel_offset=1
  * channel_type=3

NOTE: I have fallback above, so non-WPA3 tablets can connect. But my speed was limited before, when I kept it SAE only.

What do you think sir?

[morrownr]

Yet, I seem limited to 229Mbps with this. My phones do now show a little '6' on the wifi icon, though.

Shouldn't I be ... 4x that?!

I assume the 229 Mbps is a throughput speed, not a link speed. A throughput speed of 229 on the 2.4 Ghz band is smokin'.

using both + and - makes no sense

It actually can make sense. You are telling hostpad what the capabilities are, not what to run.

What do you think sir?

I don't see any obvious problems and if you are seeing a throughput reading of 229 Mbps, there can't be too much wrong. Run it and see how it does. How is the range?

As time passes, you might do a little reading to tweak the hostapd.conf settings. I haven't done WiFi 6 on 2.4 Ghz until today so I'm not fully up to speed on how to maximize performance.

[bahbarnett]

Yet, I seem limited to 229Mbps with this. My phones do now show a little '6' on the wifi icon, though.

Shouldn't I be ... 4x that?!

I assume the 229 Mbps is a throughput speed, not a link speed. A throughput speed of 229 on the 2.4 Ghz band is smokin'.

The phone is reporting a link speed of 229Mbps. It fluctuates, but will never go above that.

Looking at this chart, and reading a bit:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQXoEYLGWrR1aGyGaTXOOaDQSPLfeC4rv70KRFuRP6eZ5fL-Ku_YI6DgS6zZMNyIhQpQmnKQ1O7abij/pubhtml?gid=1848058563&single=true

This jives with AX + one spatial stream, 40MHz, when I'm standing close... eg, at 256-QAM. It matches my 299 Mbps links speed, citing '229.4'. So reading some more, it's clear I need more spatial streams. MORE. I can't seem to parse iw list -> spatial streams, or perhaps it's just that there's nothing to parse with this adapter?

Which seems very sad, and makes me dislike it. If true.

EG, I change

ht_capab=[HT40+][LDPC][SHORT-GI-20][SHORT-GI-40][TX-STBC][RX-STBC1][MAX-AMSDU-7935]

to

ht_capab=[HT40+][LDPC][SHORT-GI-20][SHORT-GI-40][TX-STBC12][RX-STBC123][MAX-AMSDU-7935]

and get

Driver does not support configured HT capability [RX-STBC*]

I'm thinking this is a major limiter, and why it's nice to have 3x spatial streams for RX for an end user, it's silly in an AP to have only one TX.

Shouldn't we be looking more into the spatial streams these adapters provide?

using both + and - makes no sense

It actually can make sense. You are telling hostpad what the capabilities are, not what to run.

Yes, and thanks, but that's a comment for me. There's no other way to choose secondary channels in 40, other than use that option, when on channel 6. You need to be specific (6 is best for me, at the edge of my land, where I can see one AP), unlike 1 or 11 as a chan, where the choice is made for you.

That AP is on channel 1, hence my reminder note.

What do you think sir?

I don't see any obvious problems and if you are seeing a throughput reading of 229 Mbps, there can't be too much wrong. Run it and see how it does. How is the range?

I think the trouble is that I need 3x spatial streams. Frankly, I'd like billions of them, but I guess 3x is a good hope.

As time passes, you might do a little reading to tweak the hostapd.conf settings. I haven't done WiFi 6 on 2.4 Ghz until today so I'm not fully up to speed on how to maximize performance.

[bahbarnett]

Note that I presume TX and RX are inverted from the perspective of the standard, and an end-user adapter like this. Because this thing allows TX of 123, but an RX of 1, yet I get no difference from TX123 vs 1. My thinking is that link speed is RX link speed, from the perspective of the phone? So if TX was really TX, I should see link speed change when manipulating this value.

Put another way, this adapter having a TX of 3, and an RX of 1 makes zero sense for an end user. If there is an imbalance such as this, more spatial on one side, it must be receive. End users need more inbound, not egress bandwidth. Therefore, TX123 must mean receive, and RX must mean send.

(How does it make sense otherwise?)

[bahbarnett]

Yeah, definitely this is the way to force high-low.

    if (os_strstr(capab, "[HT40-]")) {
        conf->ht_capab |= HT_CAP_INFO_SUPP_CHANNEL_WIDTH_SET;
        conf->secondary_channel = -1;
    }
    if (os_strstr(capab, "[HT40+]")) {
        conf->ht_capab |= HT_CAP_INFO_SUPP_CHANNEL_WIDTH_SET;
        conf->secondary_channel = 1;
    }
    if (os_strstr(capab, "[HT40+]") && os_strstr(capab, "[HT40-]")) {
        conf->ht_capab |= HT_CAP_INFO_SUPP_CHANNEL_WIDTH_SET;
        conf->ht40_plus_minus_allowed = 1;
    }

ax has the potential for 1024QAM, but I seem to be only getting 256. This is just based upon the link speed I show above, I don't know 100% for sure, but at the same time I'm looking for a way to set QAM.. but it doesn't seem I can?

I see this:

    } else if (os_strcmp(buf, "beacon_rate") == 0) {
        int val;
<snip>
        } else if (os_strncmp(pos, "he:", 3) == 0) {
            val = atoi(pos + 3);
            if (val < 0 || val > 11) {
                wpa_printf(MSG_ERROR,
                       "Line %d: invalid beacon_rate HE-MCS %d",
                       line, val);
                return 1;
            }
            conf->rate_type = BEACON_RATE_HE;
            conf->beacon_rate = val;

Which makes me think this is how to set 1024QAM in ax mode. I know I'm hitting the right code, because:

beacon_rate=he:12

throws an error matching above, where as

beacon_rate=he:11

Passes, but then throws:

Failed to set beacon parameters

So for some reason I can't set this? Even to 1? Weird. Driver limitation?

I get this from -d -d:

nl80211: Beacon set failed: -22 (Invalid argument)

Hmm. It does let me set this:

he_basic_mcs_nss_set=2

Yet I see no difference is speed.

I'll wait to hear back from you on what you think about spatial. Maybe you've run into this before. That seems like a massive limiter right now.

[morrownr]

The phone is reporting a link speed of 229Mbps. It fluctuates, but will never go above that.

It could be that the phone cannot go above that speed as it may not support higher speeds. You may need to dig to find out what the wifi capabilities of the phone are.

I'll wait to hear back from you on what you think about spatial. Maybe you've run into this before. That seems like a massive limiter right now.

The ONLY USB WiFi chipset that I have seen over the years that has 3 spatial streams is the RTL8814au but it has some problems, especially with Linux. It has really bad thermal characteristics in that if pushed, you can cook an egg. Most makers that used this chipset did not account for the thermal properties very well. Then there is the issue of the only available driver being a Realtek out-of-kernel driver and it is not a good driver. I think the only repo that still maintains the driver is the one here at this site. Realtek stopped working on the driver 4 years ago. I do my best to warn Linux users to not buy an adapter with this 8814au chipset. I have a speed test on the Main Menu, forget which item right now, and it shows that in 5 Ghz the mt7921au can keep up with or beat the rtl8814au so while spatial streams sound good on paper, in the real world, it does not seem to matter that much. If you have an adapter with 3 spatial streams, you also need an AP/Router that supports 3 spatial streams. With WiFi 6 and my mt7921au based adapters, I am already bumping up against the limits of the 1 Gbps ethernet cable in mt lan. I see around 750-800 Mbps with my mt7921au based adapter with WiFi 6 using the 5 Ghz band.

Which seems very sad, and makes me dislike it. If true.

It seems to me that you would like the capabilities of the 5 Ghz band to be available on the 2.4 Ghz band. That is not going to happen. It is cool that WiFi 6 (AX) is now available for 2.4 and if your AP/Router is capable of AX on the 2.4 band, should see some speed increase. However, things like 80 and 160 Mhz channel width will never happen because the 2.4 band does not have the capacity. As you are at a rural location, you likely can successfully use 40 Mhz channel width but that is it. I did a test here earlier today:

Band: 2.4
WiFi 6 AX

$ iperf3 -c 192.168.1.1
Connecting to host 192.168.1.1, port 5201
[  5] local 192.168.1.127 port 35846 connected to 192.168.1.1 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  26.6 MBytes   223 Mbits/sec    0   1.09 MBytes       
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  30.0 MBytes   252 Mbits/sec    0   1.37 MBytes       
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  26.2 MBytes   220 Mbits/sec    0   1.53 MBytes       
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  30.0 MBytes   252 Mbits/sec    0   1.64 MBytes       
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  27.5 MBytes   231 Mbits/sec    0   1.72 MBytes       
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  27.5 MBytes   231 Mbits/sec    0   1.84 MBytes       
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  30.0 MBytes   252 Mbits/sec    0   1.84 MBytes       
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  28.8 MBytes   241 Mbits/sec    0   1.84 MBytes       
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  30.0 MBytes   252 Mbits/sec    0   1.84 MBytes       
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  30.0 MBytes   252 Mbits/sec    0   1.84 MBytes       
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   287 MBytes   240 Mbits/sec    0             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.03  sec   284 MBytes   237 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf3 measures actual throughput. That is just flat out smoking for 2.4 band.

The moral to this story: If you need the longest range, use the 2.4 band. If you need a big pipe, use the 5 or 6 bands. That is, if else is the same and it may be for you. There are things to do to optimize wifi speed and reliability. In my case, every client I have, that I want to use 5 GHZ, works with DFS channels. The DFS channels in my area are unused so I use a DFS channel and get totally clean air and max speeds.

Driver does not support configured HT capability [RX-STBC*]

The driver may not support it because the hardware does not support it. Remember what we are using here. USB WiFi is consider a niche, home product. I would argue the home point as the analytical data at this site makes it clear that corporate IT and government users frequent this site and all we do is USB WiFi. My point being that USB WiFi does not always get the super high end features and it always comes out after the chipsets for the cards.

I think I touched on my of your questions.

@morrownr

[bahbarnett]

The phone is reporting a link speed of 229Mbps. It fluctuates, but will never go above that.

It could be that the phone cannot go above that speed as it may not support higher speeds. You may need to dig to find out what the wifi capabilities of the phone are.

I have, it claims to support 6e fully. By that chart I cited in my prior post, 229Mbps as a link speed matches 256-QAM + 40Mhz precisely.
(I realise I may be hitting some other limit, but the numbers jive which where I'm at)

I'll wait to hear back from you on what you think about spatial. Maybe you've run into this before. That seems like a massive limiter right now.

If you have an adapter with 3 spatial streams, you also need an AP/Router that supports 3 spatial streams. With WiFi 6 and my mt7921au based adapters, I am already bumping up against the limits of the 1 Gbps ethernet cable in mt lan. I see around 750-800 Mbps with my mt7921au based adapter with WiFi 6 using the 5 Ghz band.

Fair enough, but at the same time, it seems like a nice capability to have. After all, you're getting there with 160Mhz width I presume, or this chart I'm looking at makes no sense.

Which seems very sad, and makes me dislike it. If true.

It seems to me that you would like the capabilities of the 5 Ghz band to be available on the 2.4 Ghz band. That is not going to happen. It is cool that WiFi 6 (AX) is now available for 2.4 and if your AP/Router is capable of AX on the 2.4 band, should see some speed increase. However, things like 80 and 160 Mhz channel width will never happen because the 2.4 band does not have the capacity. As you are at a rural location, you likely can successfully use 40 Mhz channel width but that is it. I did a test here earlier today:

Well, I'd like the full capabilities of 2.4ghz to be available. 40ghz + ax gives 229Mbps @ 256QAM, and 286 @ 1024QAM. And that's with 1 spatial. The numbers increment for each additional. So what I'd love is spatial for 2.4ghz, then I have the range, and I have the speed.

One of the benefits of sticking with 2.4ghz, is keeping g and even b devices alive on 2.4ghz with one radio. Another is range, as you've said. It's too bad spatial doesn't seem to be validated, although this chipset supports receiving with multiple spatials it seems?

They'd be engaged in false advertising with their speed claims, I think, otherwise?

Band: 2.4 WiFi 6 AX

$ iperf3 -c 192.168.1.1
Connecting to host 192.168.1.1, port 5201
[  5] local 192.168.1.127 port 35846 connected to 192.168.1.1 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  26.6 MBytes   223 Mbits/sec    0   1.09 MBytes       
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  30.0 MBytes   252 Mbits/sec    0   1.37 MBytes       
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  26.2 MBytes   220 Mbits/sec    0   1.53 MBytes       
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  30.0 MBytes   252 Mbits/sec    0   1.64 MBytes       
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  27.5 MBytes   231 Mbits/sec    0   1.72 MBytes       
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  27.5 MBytes   231 Mbits/sec    0   1.84 MBytes       
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  30.0 MBytes   252 Mbits/sec    0   1.84 MBytes       
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  28.8 MBytes   241 Mbits/sec    0   1.84 MBytes       
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  30.0 MBytes   252 Mbits/sec    0   1.84 MBytes       
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  30.0 MBytes   252 Mbits/sec    0   1.84 MBytes       
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   287 MBytes   240 Mbits/sec    0             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.03  sec   284 MBytes   237 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf3 measures actual throughput. That is just flat out smoking for 2.4 band.

The moral to this story: If you need the longest range, use the 2.4 band. If you need a big pipe, use the 5 or 6 bands. That is, if else is the same and it may be for you. There are things to do to optimize wifi speed and reliability. In my case, every client I have, that I want to use 5 GHZ, works with DFS channels. The DFS channels in my area are unused so I use a DFS channel and get totally clean air and max speeds.

Driver does not support configured HT capability [RX-STBC*]

The driver may not support it because the hardware does not support it. Remember what we are using here. USB WiFi is consider a niche, home product. I would argue the home point as the analytical data at this site makes it clear that corporate IT and government users frequent this site and all we do is USB WiFi. My point being that USB WiFi does not always get the super high end features and it always comes out after the chipsets for the cards.

I think I touched on my of your questions.

Yes, thanks.

I still don't see how anyone is using 5ghz for anything. I know what you're saying, but both adapters I've tried won't let me connect more than 3M away from the thing, and all the ax attempts I made were to see if I could get out of some mysterious noise, at 6 through to 7ghz. Yet 5.2 through to 7, channel after channel, the range is just horrid for me.

If I can't even get connectivity at 20ghz @ 5ghz, what's the help in 80 width?

I'll have to re-think this.

@morrownr

[morrownr]

I still don't see how anyone is using 5ghz for anything. I know what you're saying, but both adapters I've tried won't let me connect more than 3M away from the thing...

There is something wrong. I did do the 2nd test on the ACM the other night. This 2nd test was torture. Distance was right at 18 meters and the signal had to go through 4 walls at an angle. I used the client and checked wavemon once in a while. Connection was stable but not fast. The signal showed 61 dBm. That is near the end of what is usable. The 1 st test was 10 meters and 2 walls and the signal was good I had good speed.

Maybe should look at the settings for 5 Ghz again as some it really wrong. For now, forget about 6 Ghz and let's get 5 Ghz working well at 80 Mhz channel width.

[morrownr]

I've been testing the AXML today on my OpenWRT WiFi router. This on 2.4.

286.7 Mbit/s, 20 MHz, HE-MCS 11, HE-NSS 2

Signal -44. 10 meters, 2 walls

There is an option in OpenWRT to force 40 Mhz:

573.5 Mbit/s, 40 MHz, HE-MCS 11, HE-NSS 2

iperf3 only showed around 125 Mbps... hey, congestion. There is no DFS for me to use with 2.4.

I think that 573.5 link rate is actually what is advertised as 600.

[bahbarnett]

Would you post the config file you used? I can't even set HE-MCS here.

[bahbarnett]

You've been quite helpful, and I appreciate that, but it's exceptionally frustrating when you give out teasers like this and then just go quiet. My max 2.4ghz wifi link speed is 229Mbps, which seems to jive with that chart url I posted. Again, to repeat, link speed, not transfer speed.

I've mentioned link speed repeatedly, but it seems you keep taking that as transfer speed. Link speed. Not transfer speed.

Yet you're reporting 600Mbps link speed(573.5), and I have zero idea how you're achieving this.

[morrownr]

Hi @bahbarnett

it's exceptionally frustrating when you give out teasers like this and then just go quiet.

I did not intentionally go quiet. I looked back and it appears that I did not mark your last message as one to come back on. That is an oversight on my part. I am making mistakes as I have been dealing with poor health over the last few months. As I feel like it, I do what I can. This site is a challenge as it has several repos and a lot of messages come in from existing issues so most people have no idea the amount of posts that happen here. The site gets about 19,000 hits per week.

I've mentioned link speed repeatedly, but it seems you keep taking that as transfer speed. Link speed. Not transfer speed.

I do know the difference. I'll try to be specific going forward.

Yet you're reporting 600Mbps link speed(573.5), and I have zero idea how you're achieving this.

It sounds like your AP/wifi router is not using a 40 Mhz channel width. How it should work is if there is a channel above or below what you are using that is at a strength to to trigger your system to not use 40 Mhz channel width, then it will not be used. Can you confirm that your AP/router is set to use 40 Mhz channel width?