On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 07:46:46PM -0600, Patrick Dohman wrote: > > > 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?
I don't understand your question. What is a "handover" and what does soft vs. hard mean?
