how do i change my mac andress using cpu on my wilres ap station wlan1 inteface?
i already have a code but it is not valid or not working ,please help?# define char table
:global chArray 0abcdef0123456789abcdef012345abcdef0123456789abcdef0123456789abcdef0123456789abcdef0123456789abcdef0123456789abcdef012345
:local strPass "";
#get counters #:local chz1num [/system clock get time ]; #:local chz2num [/system clock get time ];
:local chz3num [/system clock get time ];
:local chz4num [/system clock get time ];
:local chz5num [/system clock get time ];
:local chz6num [/system clock get time ];
:local chz7num [/system resource get cpu-load ];
:local chz8num [/system resource get cpu-load ];
:local chz9num [/system resource get uptime ];
:local chz10num [/system resource get uptime ];
:local chz11num [/system resource get uptime ];
:local chz12num [/system resource get cpu-load ];
The above statement is slightly misleading (if not un-true). Mobile phones have quite limited TX power. These are limitations for European technologies and bands:
GSM on 900MHz is limited to 33 dBm (2W) and GSM on 1800 MHz is limited to 30 dBm (1W)
UMTS and LTE are limited to 20-26 dBm (100-400 mW)
In region with reasonably good signal reception actual TX power used is lower than limit stated above. In multi-cell networks interference suppression is a big deal (especially in single-frequency networks such as UMTS and LTE) and easiest way of dealing it is by using tight power-control. It comes with a nice side-effect of reduced battery power consumption.
WiFi TX power is generally of same order of magnitude as with UMTS/LTE.
So one can’t say that WiFi TX power is “much much lower transmit power than the phones” because they are comparable.
Then one needs to account for free-space path loss, which is most of times inverse proportional to cube of distance. Meaning that signal at distance of 2 metres is 8 times less than at distance of 1 metre. The big misconception of general public is result of not knowing this. So actual EMF exposure can be quite high when having transmitting phone at one’s ears compared to exposure received from mobile base station at distance of 20 metres even though TX power of a base station can be 100-times higher (but the distance is some 10.000-times larger).
Another big misconception of general public (working in other direction than the before-mentioned one) lies in the fact that phone mostly transmits when in use (either during phone call or while using data) while base station transmits at all times (albeit with only part of total power when no user is using services from that particular base station). In this regard, WiFi AP is comparable to base station, it transmits beacon all the time.
As I already wrote: if user is concerned about EMF exposure, he/she should do something about it, possibly relocate AP to another room.
A footnote: personally I don’t believe that high frequency EMF as used for modern telecommunications is highly harmful. But for those concerned I advise to take precautions, if not for peace of mind.
It is. But what is proportion of users with GSM-only phones or that only have GSM coverage? In our network, which is by no means the most advanced in EU, we estimate to have less than 20% of those users. As I wrote as well, there’s power control in play even in GSM and our stats show that TX power, used by phones, is lower than 10dBm (10mW, quite lower than usual AP setting) 99% of transmit time.
And, when talking about GSM: one should not forget that GSM is actually TDMA technology with “duty cycle” of 1:8 (for voice calls, GPRS/EDGE has higher “duty cycle” due to multi-TS usage). Power limit of 30/33 dBm is absolute limit and considering “duty cycle”, average TX power for GSM phones is 9 dB less (21-24 dBm) which is, surprisingly, comparable to WiFi TX power again.
Sure there’s a quantity where GSM is not as shiny: electric field strength (expressed in units of V/m). TX power is dispersed over wide frequency bandwidth with modern technologies (3.84 MHz + whatever penetrates into guard band at UMTS, 5-20MHz per LTE carrier, 11 MHz at legacy WiFi, up to 160MHz with 802.11ac) while GSM frequency bandwidth is “merely” 200kHz. Which means that at same TX power, electric field strength of GSM signal is some 100-times (give or take) higher than that of modern technologies.
I believe, however, that most of research that does show correlation, indicates correlation between potential diseases and total energy of EMF absorbed - total energy is proportional to TX power regardless of frequency band width. Health hazards, where high V/m comes in play, appear at really high strengths of electrical field and “consumer-grade” equipment is not capable of producing those.
Thank you all for your replies.
First- I cannot relocate the router as the optic fiber point is in that bedroom.
So as I understand you advice to leave it as is - with the WiFi on.
You can simply reduce the TX power a little bit, while it still works satisfactory. An easy way to reduce power is to set antenna gain above zero. It will reduce tx power to compensate (even though you actually don’t have a high gain antenna). Then it will be totally fine and safe.
There is absolutely no need for this. I seriously do not recommend mucking around with these settings as you’ll find yourself with issues down the road when something screws up.
Let’s be clear on this: Washer/Dryers, A/C units, Water Heaters, DECT/cordless phones, Microwaves, Bluetooth, Remote Controls, Mobile Phones, Florescent based lights, etc, etc, etc, etc. All of these things result in EM be generated. To sit around and try to lower the TX/power or whatever to “reduce EMF” is a total waste if the A/C unit is any where near your room, even on the outside. It is also a waste if any of those things I listed (or even more I didn’t) are in your area. These are all putting out EM and since EM can travel and go through walls, that means your neighbors running any of those things can generate EM in your area.
There are numerous things around you that generate more EM than your wifi router. Not only that, the W.H.O. and other research bodies have done numerous studies and tests and discovered that a wifi router or other low band EM (DECT phones, washer/dryer, etc) devices are not high enough in EM to be of any real damage. The complaints people have about wifi/EM hurting their brains cannot be directly linked to things like wifi routers or other devices that generate EM.
Sorry that I’m late to this party, but I was wondering if it would be possible to detect if a client wants to connect, and only THEN increase transmitting power of the AP?
Eg. through the registration list.
(and decrease if there is no more clients)
Not that I’m worried for my health, but just a nice proof of concept on how to detect the existence of wifi-clients in a RoS script.
I could think of other nice things to be based on this
Interested to see the replies for this from the scripting guru’s on this forum.
Got a little creative and started playing around myself…
Came up with this:
:global clients [/interface wireless registration-table print count-only]
if ($clients>0) do={ /interface wireless set [ find default-name=wlan1 ] tx-power=26 } else={ /interface wireless set [ find default-name=wlan1 ] tx-power=12 }
..sets power to 12dbm when no clients are connected, and 26 when they are. Also assumes a fixed power output setting (“all rates fixed”)
You can make a script out of this and schedule it VERY regularly (so that power is increased fast when needed).
The limits here are arbitrary, could be that in certain conditions they need to be adjusted. For instance, the lower limit shouldn’t be so low that clients cannot connect anymore. And the upper limit of 26might be more than your device can handle, or than is allowed in your country.
Also, I tested it with 2.4G. But at 5G there is likely a radar check that is being run after power change. And this leads to long periods of disconnection. During this period the # clients is 0, and so power will be turned to low again (and triggering another radar check).
Therefore I doubt that this will work well for 5G unless used on a frequency without radarcheck or under “superchannel” mode.
edit:
Still needs some refinement: even setting a powervalue that is already selected, triggers a disconnect/reconnect. This is not nice…
Must be something like “if clients>0 and currentpower=max, then do nothing, else set power to min”. etc…
Ahhh, always nice to see people calling you names instead of actually contributing something.
Especially as that person apparently lacks the capacities to read a entire 2 posts back to see that I mention that I actually don’t believe that the radiation is a problem, but that I was in fact interested to see if someone here knew how to script a wifi-registration-list test (that indeed CAN be used to reduce power as the original poster of this thread asked, so I posted it here).
Since nobody answered after two days, I thought I give it a shot myself, and experimented my first idea together in about 30 minutes. That is what I posted to share with the crowd.
Enough to put other people that might be interested on the right track too, possibly even enthusiastic about other options that this may create.
This is what technical fora are all about… sharing KNOWLEDGE… (If you want to rant, go to facebook or twitter and knock yourself out)
If you are not interested in this script, just ignore it. Don’t try to kill off any if not all creativity regarding RoS awesome scripting tool, and the sharing of information about it.
In your case Sid, I would advise you to just continue to the RoS quickset feature. For you, that’s probably more than enough.
Yes and a bunch of people with knowledge are saying this is a non-issue and shouldn’t be something to worry about. None of us here are against sharing knowledge with others, quite the opposite. There are plenty of use here though that are against sharing poor knowledge because poor knowledge begets more poor knowledge.
Also, for the record, I do not see anyone calling you names or stupid. The concept/idea/logic behind it was called stupid but not you. Just keep in mind a lot of APs do not allow the user to mess with these settings because people with no or poor knowledge of RF/wifi can break things. Mikrotik’s are meant to be used by those with at least a basic to strong knowledge on things. In most cases more to the strong side of the scale.
I’ve lost count of how many techs I’ve wished I could Men In Black flashy-thing all the bad knowledge out of their head because they are stuck on that as their base. All that does it cause them to draw wrong or misleading conclusions on problems and their solution can either be a total kludge or make things worse.
I’m not going into this discussion any further regarding whether we should pursue this because some people think it is stupid.
Nor regardless whether some people think calling people, their ideas, or their technical solutions, “utterly stupid” is within common decency.
My point is that is we need to share scripting info (in this case about how to read the registration table the best way), since the last few years real guru’s tend to react less and less. And with it, proliferation from scripting knowledge is also less and less… (btw, I don’t say the old guru’s “don’t want to” anymore, they probably just moved on to other things in their lives)
In the old days, I even did not have to make an account to ask these things myself, as the guru’s were explaining just about everything here. I learned a truckload of knowledge that way.
But I missed/can’t find the part how to use the registration table info in scripting… Apparently it wasn’t ever discussed in depth. And like I typed before, you can do much more that way than just reduce power.
And sure, with scripts, an unskilled person can kill just about any functionality in RoS. Not just with registration table scripts. And general scripting questions are not banned either.
With knowledge comes power, with power comes responsibility.
Therefore, I reiterate:… guru’s and guru-apprentices … please discuss registration-table scripting!!!
Learn. Think. Create. SHARE!!
And also mention the pitfalls.
But don’t be censored by the mere opinions of the few!
And if you really feel so bad about it.. Just ignore and move on. Don’t poison this thread.
