On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 10:21 -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 00:11 +1200, Simon Geard wrote: > > 00:17:9A:12:31:72 : Quality=49/70 Signal level=-46 dBm Noise > level=-95 dBm > > ^^^^ This looks wrong > > Quality is supposed to be a linear value between 0 and max_qual.qual > inclusive. 49/70 = 70%; and with a signal of -46dBm and a noise of -95 > dBm, that seems bogus. It should be higher than that. -46 dBm is > _really good_. > > > 00:14:7C:AD:39:92 : Quality=120/70 Signal level=-256 dBm Noise level=-95 dBm > > ^^^^ This is wrong > > A value of 120 is clearly outside the bounds of 0, 70. I've actually seen *positive* dBm values reported by the drivers before, so yeah, not very good. Simon.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part