good signal, totally weird CCQ

I get the following report on a client wireless interface:

signal-strength: -70dBm
tx-signal-strength: -81dBm
noise-floor: -97dBm
signal-to-noise: 27dB
tx-ccq: 6%
rx-ccq: 87%
p-throughput: 56
overall-tx-ccq: 6%

The card on an RB532 has a 12dB antenna with the AP only around 500 meters away. However the above is with TX power wound right down to 3dB! With it at its default of 17dB reported TX-signal-strength was -68dBm, rx-ccq could be 100% but tx-ccq down to 3% and cutting out.

Can anyone suggest what might be causing the problem?

The cards in the link wouldn’t happen to be an R52HN or R5HN cards would they?

If it is an R52 in b/g mode, 17db is too much and 3db is too little. 15db is as high as I would go. I leave tx-power-mode=default. Let it figure it out what it needs at each speed.

No, I know they’re not these, although I’m not sure what the card is except that by MAC it’s a Senao and according to RouterOS it has an Atheros AR5213 chipset. The link was working perfectly well before I swapped the RB532A its had for three years had for an RB532 as this set-up didn’t need three ethernet ports and I needed a board for somewhere that did.

During the swap the utterly useless, imbecile-designed u.fl. connection popped off the card and re-connecting it was the usual nightmare but given that I get tx/rx ccq readings from 3/100 to 6/90 I can’t think it’s the pigtail connection.

17dB is its default.

One other thing. The frequency set is 2412 and a scan reveals there are links using 2437 and 2462 in the vicinity. However a frequency-usage scan picks up big spikes of intermittent use at both 2412 and 2417.

500 mtrs is not a very big distance so u might get similar readings even without the pigtail. Have a check it could be the Ufl connection.

Dear Sir,

I think you might face interference problem in 2.4 Ghz surround your client links, i suggest try to change polarity antenna to vertical or diagonal polarization and configure data-rate lower than default , configure manual tx-power higher than default, maybe it could raise your overall CCQ more better. TIA

Best Regards,

Ojie Nugraha

Not if the clients noise floor is -97, I’m have the same problem, CCQ is great, noise floor -100dbm, signal strength -65 at both ends but as soon as a client starts to transmit heavy traffic, then CCQ goes to crap on all clients…very aggravating and I haven’t been able to figure out why.

Probably, fresnel zones and generic CPE’s