<solved> wireless signal strength indicator discrepancies

[Nish]

Pardon - I had a hard time with the subject line of this and likewise couldn't think of proper search terms.  Not giving particulars here because it is not about a piece of hardware, it about interface if that makes sense.

I just got an old laptop.  This if my first install of any linux on a laptop since this is my first OWN laptop.  This also happens to be my first foray into wireless in linux.

Was very happy PCLOS recognized the laptop's onboard wireless and it had an OK strength of 3-4 bars in the TRAY ("link level").  I felt it could have been better since the laptop is sitting next to the wireless router - hmm, eighteen inches. But OK.  Then I double clicked on the tray icon and the dialog that appears (Network Center) shows only 2-3 bars.  Figured I had a crummy wireless chip in this and picked up a highly regarded USB one.  Sure enough, boot up with that baby and PCLOS recognized it and there are all five bars in the tray.

However, click on the icon, get the dialog box with all the network things and it shows 3 bars.  Why the difference?  I have come to the conclusion the tray is right and that dialog box must be wrong.  Same laptop in windows always gives five bars anywhere in the apt and I can't believe linux would find it so different.  For grins and chuckles I dug up an old usb adapter from a junk box.  Same problem, tray icon shows two more bars than network center.

If you want particulars let me know.  But I don't think I have a hardware problem -maybe I am not reading these things right - how difficult can it be 1-5 bars, right?  5  about 100%?  

[djohnston]

On two wireless devices here, I get different readings, depending on what app is "looking" at the device. NetApplet in the systray usually shows a stronger signal than the settings in PCC. It's always been that way, as far as I can remember. Unless you start dropping sent or received packets, I wouldn't worry about it.

[Nish]

Thanks, since I never did this in linux before I wasn't sure if I was reading this right.

Which brings me to ask, how would I know if I was dropping packets?

[Rudge]

My Android phone exhibits similar behavior with my wireless router.

As mentioned by djohnston, I wouldn't worry about it. Connection strength has never seemed to be a factor as long as you have reliability.  

[Rudge]

Thanks, since I never did this in linux before I wasn't sure if I was reading this right.

Which brings me to ask, how would I know if I was dropping packets?

I think your router keeps a log that would show them.

[djohnston]

Quickest way. Open a terminal. su to root, then run ifconfig on your device.

su -
ifconfig eth0
exit
exit

If you're unsure which device to look at, just do ifconfig, which will list all network devices. You'll see a summary of transmitted and received packets, as well as any dropped packets.

[Rudge]

Thanks Darrel.    Networking has to be my weakness.

[Nish]

Quickest way. Open a terminal. su to root, then run ifconfig on your device.

su -
ifconfig eth0
exit
exit

If you're unsure which device to look at, just do ifconfig, which will list all network devices. You'll see a summary of transmitted and received packets, as well as any dropped packets.

ooh thanks, I know that place from looking for IP address.  So it saves these statistics for the current session?  Well, so far so good

[djohnston]

Thanks Darrel.    Networking has to be my weakness.

Yours and mine, both. That's why we depend on muungwana. 

[Rudge]

Thanks Darrel.    Networking has to be my weakness.

Yours and mine, both. That's why we depend on muungwana. 

 

[ElCuervo]

Quickest way. Open a terminal. su to root, then run ifconfig on your device.

su -
ifconfig eth0
exit
exit

If you're unsure which device to look at, just do ifconfig, which will list all network devices. You'll see a summary of transmitted and received packets, as well as any dropped packets.

http://i40.tinypic.com/2zf4viq.jpg

I am no muungwana, but I think ping works better because it actually hits the router (or whatever else you point it at) with packets until you hit ctrl+C:

[alan@localhost ~]$ ping 192.168.1.1
PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=1.39 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=2.68 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=1.92 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=1.71 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=5 ttl=64 time=3.16 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=6 ttl=64 time=2.34 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=7 ttl=64 time=2.67 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=8 ttl=64 time=3.70 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=9 ttl=64 time=3.10 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=10 ttl=64 time=1.77 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=11 ttl=64 time=1.92 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=12 ttl=64 time=2.14 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=13 ttl=64 time=2.15 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=14 ttl=64 time=1.15 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=15 ttl=64 time=2.48 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_req=16 ttl=64 time=2.21 ms
^C
--- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics ---
16 packets transmitted, 16 received, 0% packet loss, time 15025ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.158/2.285/3.707/0.652 ms
[alan@localhost ~]$

[AS]

I am no muungwana, but I think ping works better because it actually hits the router (or whatever else you point it at) with packets until you hit ctrl+C:

+1,

even better if you use ping -f  (flood) :

ping -f 192.168.1.254
$ ping -f 192.168.1.254
PING 192.168.1.254 (192.168.1.254) 56(84) bytes of data.
.....(~ 3 secs)^C
--- 192.168.1.254 ping statistics ---
2036 packets transmitted, 2035 received, 0% packet loss, time 3187ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.273/1.504/8.917/0.410 ms, ipg/ewma 1.566/1.525 ms