This sounds about right. Even with the standard channel separation (1,6 and 11 BTW) you will still have some radiated signal in the opposing band. This is because the RF filtering in most wi-fi devices isn't all that spectacular. Putting the 2 devices in different polarization planes will help some but since one is an omni it will transcieve in the other antenna's physical direction anyway.
One way you make this work would be a band pass filter on each piece of hardware. (Take a look at: http://www.rflinx.com/2.4GHz%20Tunable%20Amp-filter.htm ) In all honesty though unless one or both are transferring data at a rate that comes close to saturation there shouldn't be that much of a problem if one radio triggers the CD of the other. Dan. On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 05:28:39PM -0500, David Young wrote: > On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 05:45:48PM -0400, S Woodside wrote: > > If they're on non-interfering channels (there are 3 in USA, 1, 7, 11) > > then no problem. > > Let me put this question another way. > > A local WISP puts two radios into each of its routers. Each radio > attaches to a high-gain antenna: one to an omni, the other to a > patch. They tell me they went to great lengths to achieve great > enough separation of the two radios' signals, lengths that went *way* > beyond tuning the radios to different channels, before one radio would > not routinely activate the other's carrier sense (thus inhibiting > transmissions). > > The lengths that they went to included moving the antennas to different > masts, and crossing their polarization. > > Does anybody know if it is ordinarily so much trouble to isolate > 802.11b radios? > > Dave > > -- > David Young OJC Technologies > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 > -- > general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> > [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
