5.8 phones and interference with wireless LANS

Our 2.4ghz wireless phone often causes our wireless PC connections to drop
and Linksys WAP11 has to be recycled. I am hoping to improve this with the
new 5.8ghz phones. But according to this article

<URL>http://telecom.hellodirect.com/docs/...uency.1.031903.
asp</URL>

some of the newer 5.8ghz phones transmit base-to-handset on 5.8 but
handset-to-base on 2.4, to consume less power and extend battery life. It
seems fair to assume that phones that use this power-conservation approach
won't really improve things much for the wLAN. Is that right? Any phones
that transmit exclusively on 5.8? Anyone able to share specific product
experiences relating to this issue?

Thanks
Timo

"Timo" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:LfGdnbcCJcd_Lr3cRVn-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Our 2.4ghz wireless phone often causes our wireless PC connections to drop
> and Linksys WAP11 has to be recycled. I am hoping to improve this with the
> new 5.8ghz phones. But according to this article
>
>
<URL>http://telecom.hellodirect.com/docs/...uency.1.031903.
> asp</URL>
>
> some of the newer 5.8ghz phones transmit base-to-handset on 5.8 but
> handset-to-base on 2.4, to consume less power and extend battery life. It
> seems fair to assume that phones that use this power-conservation approach
> won't really improve things much for the wLAN. Is that right? Any phones
> that transmit exclusively on 5.8? Anyone able to share specific product
> experiences relating to this issue?

AFAIK, you can still buy 900 MHz cordless phones, and I've never had any
problem with them interfering with my wireless lan.

YMMV.

William
(Filter noise from my address for direct replies.)

Hmm. The article refers to 802.11a as a new protocol, so this isn't very
recent. Which doesn't mean it isn't correct.

I hadn't read that handset->base could be 2.4. The easiest way to avoid the
issue is to look for a 900 Mhz phone. But before you shop for a new phone,
have you tried all options with your current 2.4 phone? It should
automatically seek a channel that is not busy, but it might be making a bad
choice. You can usually set the phone's channel manually. Combined with your
ability to configure the Linksys manually, you should be able to set the two
very far apart, and avoid the conflict.

If that doesn't work, and you can't find or don't want a 900 Mhz phone, I'd
buy a 5.8 Ghz phone from a place with a good return policy,

"Timo" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:LfGdnbcCJcd_Lr3cRVn-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Our 2.4ghz wireless phone often causes our wireless PC connections to drop
> and Linksys WAP11 has to be recycled. I am hoping to improve this with the
> new 5.8ghz phones. But according to this article
>
>
<URL>http://telecom.hellodirect.com/docs/...uency.1.031903.
> asp</URL>
>
> some of the newer 5.8ghz phones transmit base-to-handset on 5.8 but
> handset-to-base on 2.4, to consume less power and extend battery life. It
> seems fair to assume that phones that use this power-conservation approach
> won't really improve things much for the wLAN. Is that right? Any phones
> that transmit exclusively on 5.8? Anyone able to share specific product
> experiences relating to this issue?
>
> Thanks
> Timo
>
>
>

The sure fire alternative is to go the other way; leave the phones in the
2.4 band and switch the wireless to the 5 gHz (802.11A) band. Unlike the 2.4
GHz band where you run into phones, and all sorts of unlicensed stuff, right
now there is in't anything else interfering on the 5GHz band. I had a
similar problem at home several years ago and solved it that way much to my
satisfaction.


"Timo" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:LfGdnbcCJcd_Lr3cRVn-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Our 2.4ghz wireless phone often causes our wireless PC connections to drop
> and Linksys WAP11 has to be recycled. I am hoping to improve this with the
> new 5.8ghz phones. But according to this article
>
>
<URL>http://telecom.hellodirect.com/docs/...uency.1.031903.
> asp</URL>
>
> some of the newer 5.8ghz phones transmit base-to-handset on 5.8 but
> handset-to-base on 2.4, to consume less power and extend battery life. It
> seems fair to assume that phones that use this power-conservation approach
> won't really improve things much for the wLAN. Is that right? Any phones
> that transmit exclusively on 5.8? Anyone able to share specific product
> experiences relating to this issue?
>
> Thanks
> Timo
>
>
>

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:24:55 -0400, "Timo" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Our 2.4ghz wireless phone often causes our wireless PC connections to drop
>and Linksys WAP11 has to be recycled.

I can see where it might cause it to stall or drop connections, but
not send the WAP11 into a comatose state. I've done some testing with
2.4Ghz interference issues on some access points (not WAP11 sorry). I
can usually get them to hickup, stall, spew garbage, disconnect, slow
down or otherwise screw up, but never to hang. On the other hand,
I've had a few client radios, in various Windoze boxes, hang when
faced with interference due to possible driver bugs and glitches.
Don't assume it's your WAP11.

>I am hoping to improve this with the
>new 5.8ghz phones.

Expensive. Methinks you should look at 900MHz phones. They're
cheaper, have better range, and don't eat batteries.

>But according to this article
>http://telecom.hellodirect.com/docs/...y.1.031903.asp

Groan...

>some of the newer 5.8ghz phones transmit base-to-handset on 5.8 but
>handset-to-base on 2.4, to consume less power and extend battery life.

I've never heard of such a phone. Methinks it would be labelled as
some kind of "dual band" phone. Also it's a dumb idea because all the
RF generating and receiving components would need to be duplicated in
both the base and handsel. The only reason I could see for such an
arrangement it would allow easier handset to handset communications
through the phone base. However, it would simultaneously eliminate
direct handset to handset communications.

Another possiblity is if they used simple FM modulation instead of
spread spectrum and are running full duplex. That would require a
5.8GHz duplexer at the antenna. Those are not trivial devices and
could get both lossy, complex, and expensive. So, to maintain full
duplex and eliminate the duplexer, a larger RX/RX frequency spread
would be required. 5.8/2.4 works. 100% duty cycle transmit also
sucks lots of power as compared to spread spectrum (half duplex) so
that contradicts the article. Such a "dual band" phone would burn
MORE battery power when talking. It would also eliminate the
possiblity of direct handset to handset communications. However, the
simple FM modulation, full duplex, dual band, system does have one
advantage.... it's cheap.

If you have time, call Hello Direct and ask them for the specific
"dual band" model. If possible, get the FCC ID so I can see what
they're doing inside.

Incidentally, I dunno where they fabricated their frequency vs range
table. Methinks it's backwards. I get MUCH better range on 900MHz
than I've ever seen at 2.4Ghz. I don't own a 5.8Ghz phone, but the
few I've tried in a store, barely made it to 50ft and would not go
through any substantial obstructions. Methinks 300-2000ft for 5.8Ghz
is pure wishful thinking.

>It
>seems fair to assume that phones that use this power-conservation approach
>won't really improve things much for the wLAN. Is that right? Any phones
>that transmit exclusively on 5.8? Anyone able to share specific product
>experiences relating to this issue?

Good logic. If it spews RF at 2.4Ghz, it might interfere.

My limited experience with 2.4Ghz phones is that the non-spread
spectrum flavour tend to start at the bottom end of the band and work
their way up in frequency until they find an empty channel. You might
find it useful to change the channel on your WAP11 to Ch11 and see if
that improves things.


--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS 831-336-2558