Backup channel selection in wireless LANs

• US 20060171335A1
• Filed: 04/11/2005
• Published: 08/03/2006
• Est. Priority Date: 02/03/2005
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Piccata Fund Limited Liability Company (Intellectual Ventures LLC)
• Original Assignee: Piccata Fund Limited Liability Company (Intellectual Ventures LLC)
• Inventors: Durand, Roger, Yuen, Michael, Hill, David R.
• Application Number:
  US11/103,403
• Publication Number:
  US 20060171335A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 370/255
• CPC Class Codes: H04W 36/06 Reselecting a communication resource in the serving access point
• CPC Class Codes: H04W 36/08 Reselecting an access point

Abstract

Potential alternate channels in a wireless network are periodically analyzed and ranked in terms of interference. The best ranked alternate channel is selected as the new operating channel if a decision is made to move from the current operating channel to an alternate channel. Because the potential alternate channels are pre-ranked, the move to the new channel can be executed relatively quickly, and with reduced risk of encountering unacceptable interference conditions. Various ranking categories may be used, including but not limited to a first category that is relatively free of interference, a second category that has some interference but will support degraded communications, and a third category that has an unacceptable level of interference. Within a given rank, preference may be given to channels that were most recently analyzed and ranked.

Claims

1. A method for coping with interference in a wireless network comprising the steps of:

analyzing a plurality of alternate operating channels;

ranking the alternate operating channels according to interference detected when analyzing the channels; and

if a decision is made to move to an alternate operating channel, selecting the best ranked alternate operating channel.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in a range of 61-182 μ

Sec, said step of ranking includes the further step of ranking the channel as being relatively free of interference.

3. The method of claim 1 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in a range of 183-427 μ

Sec, said step of ranking includes the further step of ranking the channel as having interference but being capable of supporting communications.

4. The method of claim 1 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in a range of 428-549 μ

Sec, said step of ranking includes the further step of ranking the channel as having interference but being capable of supporting communications.

5. The method of claim 1 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in a range of 550-1342 μ

Sec, said step of ranking includes the further step of ranking the channel as having interference and being unlikely able to support communications at a reasonable data rate.

6. The method of claim 1 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in a range of 1343-2684 μ

Sec, said step of ranking includes the further step of ranking the channel as having interference and being unlikely able to support communications at a reasonable data rate.

7. The method of claim 1 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in a range of 2685-3660 μ

Sec, said step of ranking includes the further step of ranking the channel as having interference and being unlikely able to support communications at a reasonable data rate.

8. The method of claim 1 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in a range of 3661-8540 μ

Sec, said step of ranking includes the further step of ranking the channel as having interference and being unlikely able to support communications at a reasonable data rate.

9. The method of claim 1 wherein, if interference pulse duration is greater than 8541 μ

Sec, said step of ranking includes the further step of ranking the channel as having interference and being unlikely able to support communications at a reasonable data rate.

10. The method of claim 1 including the further step of rating channels with similar rank in terms of age, such that a channel of a given rank that was most recently analyzed is preferred for selection over other channels of that same rank.

11. The method of claim 1 wherein said step of analyzing alternate operating channels is executed during quiet intervals.

12. The method of claim 1 wherein said step of analyzing alternate operating channels is executed by a parallel demodulation engine.

13. The method of claim 1 including the further step of testing the selected alternate channel, prior to moving communications to that alternate channel, to determine whether that alternate channel is acceptable.

14. The method of claim 13 including the further step of selecting the next best ranked alternate channel if the previously selected channel is determined to be unacceptable.

15. Apparatus operable to mitigate the effects of interference in a wireless network comprising:

processing logic operable to analyze a plurality of alternate operating channels;

processing logic operable to rank the alternate operating channels according to interference detected when analyzing the channels; and

processing logic operable to select the best ranked alternate operating channel if a decision is made to move to an alternate operating channel.

16. The apparatus of claim 15 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in the range of 61-182 μ

Sec, said processing logic operable to rank the alternate operating channel as being relatively free of interference.

17. The apparatus of claim 15 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in the range of 183-427 μ

Sec, said processing logic operable to rank the alternate operating channel as having interference but being capable of supporting communications.

18. The apparatus of claim 15 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in the range of 428-549 μ

Sec, said processing logic operable to rank the alternate operating channel as having interference but being capable of supporting communications.

19. The apparatus of claim 15 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in the range of 550-1342 μ

Sec, said processing logic operable to rank the alternate operating channel as having interference and being unlikely able to support communications at a reasonable data rate.

20. The apparatus of claim 15 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in the range of 1343-2684 μ

Sec, said processing logic operable to rank the alternate operating channel as having interference and being unlikely able to support communications at a reasonable data rate.

21. The apparatus of claim 15 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in the range of 2685-3660 μ

Sec, said processing logic operable to rank the alternate operating channel as having interference and being unlikely able to support communications at a reasonable data rate.

22. The apparatus of claim 15 wherein, if interference pulse duration is in the range of 3661-8540 μ

Sec, said processing logic operable to rank the alternate operating channel as having interference and being unlikely able to support communications at a reasonable data rate.

23. The apparatus of claim 15 wherein, if interference pulse duration is greater than 8541 μ

Sec, said processing logic operable to rank the alternate operating channel as having interference and being unlikely able to support communications at a reasonable data rate.

24. The apparatus of claim 15 further including processing logic operable to rate channels with similar rank in terms of age, such that a channel of a given rank that was most recently analyzed is preferred for selection over other channels of that same rank.

25. The apparatus of claim 15 wherein said processing logic operable to analyze alternate operating channels is further operable to gather data during quiet intervals.

26. The apparatus of claim 15 further including a parallel demodulation engine, and wherein the processing logic operable to analyze alternate operating channels is further operable top gather data via the parallel demodulation engine.

27. The apparatus of claim 15 further including processing logic operable to test the selected alternate channel prior to moving communications to that alternate channel in order to determine whether that alternate channel is acceptable.

28. The apparatus of claim 27 wherein the processing logic operable to test the selected alternate channel is further operable to selecting the next best ranked alternate channel if the previously selected channel is determined to be unacceptable.