So a device (is supposed to) automagically tether(s) to the “best” (theoretically nearest) node based on signal strength, and it’s easy? That’s dope. I don’t know which model he has, but I appreciate the additional information.
1 Like
That’s the 1 “flaw” I find with the auto assign in the XE75/AXE5400. I think it may be the IoT network that the system relates primarily to the main router/node. Easy refers to minimum effort to assign to another node. 2 steps once you are in the node where the device was assigned.
You don’t consider a 2 step process easy?
You can also assign the device to a specific wifi band if it is compatible, i.e. 5ghz or 6ghz if you want to move from 2.4ghz.
I didn’t say that. I think perhaps you misinterpreted my comment. A two-step process seems both easy and peasy!
“(theoretically nearest) node based on signal strength, and it’s easy? That’s dope” And yes the 2 step process was not part of the conversation at that point so I will concede maybe a misinterpretation.
It’s the TP Link XE75/AXE5400 3 unit mesh.
Thank you. I suspect the misunderstanding may center on one of the accepted definitions of “dope”. 
You realize that Merriam-Webster actually sends little crawlies back into posts from which its site is linked, dope?
Are you pro little-crawlies-spreading-through-our-stable-community? 
The mesh systems can be finnicky as it also relies on the client device quite a bit, especially older 2.4ghz N devices, which is what most IOT devices are. The mesh system can attempt to trick those devices into doing what it wants them to, but it doesn’t always succeed as you’ve seen. Manually binding devices can make it better.
Some will go as far as assigning a separate SSID on each node so they can force each device to use only the one they want it to, but that becomes a bit of a management nightmare and many mesh systems won’t allow it in mesh mode, you have to run them as independent APs on different channels etc. So not the best solution typically.
The behavior you’re seeing often means your nodes are too close together, which is common. You could reduce the power level (if they allow that) or maybe remove a node and reposition the remaining ones to see if the “automatic” distribution works better, but sounds like it is working OK how you have it now. The ideal setup is usually only a 10 to 20% overlap in the coverage area of each node, but without professional site survey equipment etc that’s not something the average user is going to be able to set up or know.
Oh, yes! Track ERRTHANG!
1 Like
I have the same mesh. Its the best I have used considering I must have the 140+ device limit.
@Crease - I have read many of your posts in many thread conversations. You have even responded to some of my post helpfully. You’re a hellavu guy to read. Can’t define you as any specific persona. By design maybe? Just sayin’.
1 Like
I don’t know what that means, but I’ll take it as a compliment…almost like you’re sayin’ I’m “dope” or something.
At the very least, I’m sincerely glad that you’ve found some of my responses helpful! Thank you!
1 Like
In case you didn’t know, @Crease is an AI bot 
1 Like
He stays on-topic too much. He’s hard to manipulate. And a swell head to boot.
Overrated. 
2 Likes
@habib - thanks for the info, it adds some perspective 
1 Like
Another affection-denier. The place is lousy with 'em. 
1 Like
I have the same system but added a couple outdoor APs to it as well. That helped a lot on a couple cameras that I had farther out.
@cori787 - I am contemplating that as a possibility. A storage shed is currently being built in back of my property. Although it will be in view of the cameras on the back of house, I want to put one on the shed itself. Not sure if my spare ODcam.v1 or a BCP can get the job done.
1 Like
