> On Dec 28, 2019, at 6:11 AM, Stefan Sperling <s...@stsp.name> wrote: > > Access points at 36c3 use low transmit power on purpose, and often fall below > the RSSI threshold which trigger background scans. At some locations (e.g. > at the lake in CCL) I've seen iwm(4) ping-pong between APs repeatedly even > while the laptop is stationary. > > I am now running with the diff below which prevents roaming to a new AP > with an RSSI level below the background scan threshold. In other words, > if we can tell ahead of time that the new candiate AP will also trigger > background scans then there is little point in switching to it.
My understanding is that RSSI is a valid consideration in a soft handover. Do you consider soft handovers a secure roaming implementation? Is a hard handover option safer & simpler?
