Wi-Fi instability on computer and smartphone - PLAY BOX NET ROUTER HFC and TPLINK Archer C6

Hey I have a big problem with my Wi-Fi connection. Namely, I recently ran out of my contract with UPC, to which I had no complaints, but Play took over UPC, so I had to sign a 300 Mbps fibre internet contract with them. Well, I have a PLAY BOX NET HFC router, I have fibre brought into the building, then coaxial cable to the router. On the other side of the flat I have a TPLINK Archer C6 router, to which an RJ cable is run. We use 4 computers, 3 are connected by cable, with which there are no problems, one uses Wi-Fi and here are the stairs, because the connection on this computer or any smartphone is unstable. During a 30-minute ping of Google's servers, the connection broke 20 times, where previously there were no problems. Hardresets, changing Wi-Fi channels, connecting to one router or the other (the problem occurs on both), connecting from 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz do not help. This is the second time I've tried the topic, as the first time it broke the connection, the topic didn't post due to which I had to post again. What can I do to alleviate the problem? I am completely unfamiliar with networks, connections, and Play washes their hands stating that the Wi-Fi has a right to be unstable, they are not even willing to replace the router. Regards

xyzixyqr wrote:

I recently ran out of contract with UPC, which I had no complaints about, but Play took over UPC so I had to sign a contract with them

.
You didn't have to do anything. When will people learn that contracts are NOT signed and NOT renewed? You end a fixed term contract and then fly on it indefinitely for many years on usually better terms than the new loyalty. You had a contract with no inflation clauses etc, now you will be paying more every year at Play's whim.
As for the problem - install WiFi Analyzer and do an ether scan on the 2.4 and 5Ghz bands. Archer C6 obviously in AP mode set up and not in router mode?

xyzixyqr wrote:

Play washes its hands stating that WiFi has the right to be unstable

.
They are 100% right here, especially in blocks of flats.

xyzixyqr wrote:

Play took over UPC, so I had to sign a 300 Mbps fibre internet deal with them.

No, you didn't have to do anything.
You can still sign a contract with UPC Poland for e.g. 2 years .
And if you signed the contract no more than 14 days ago and remotely, you can terminate it and go back to UPC (their phone still works).

IC_Current wrote:

You terminate a fixed term contract and then fly on it indefinitely for many years on usually better terms than the new loyalty.

This is where I disagree .
Every contract, no matter with whom I have, I terminate. This results in new contracts I always have that are better (and priced and offered).

xyzixyqr wrote:

Play washes its hands, stating that Wi-Fi has the right to be unstable,

.
No one, anywhere, no operator, guarantees WiFi performance/range.

xyzixyqr wrote:

even they are not willing to replace the router

.
You will get a second, same botched hardware and software device - they don't have any others (either Kaon or SDMC).
No public IP, botched IPv4 (they even botched that), WiFi issues, device stability....

KOCUREK1970 wrote:

This is where I disagree.
Every contract no matter with whom I have, I terminate. This makes the new contracts I have always better (and in terms of price and offer).

.
It was and se ne vrati quickly. When you have infrastructure in a block from five operators, they are still willing to negotiate with you. If there's one - two then I guess they've pored over their competitor's offer databases and know exactly what to offer you and know that you won't sign a new contract anywhere cheaper, or without inflation clauses.
That's how it was with mobile network offers. You terminated the contract and they tried, because competitors many. Now in unison they have all raised prices on new offers, there is nowhere to run to (apart from card/subscription, but these solutions quite a few people don't intellectually grasp). There's a whole section on the Telepolis forum with changing offers and comparing them. For a year now, everyone who's been posting there has either got an inferior renewal offer, or if they even gave a "notice" they've had to tuck their ears and withdraw that notice, because a few hours before their contract was due to be terminated they either had an inferior offer from a competitor or an inferior offer from their current provider, and often no one just bothered and they didn't even call.
Look at what happened with the phone subscription at Vectra. Seemingly a year ago there was a promotion at 10£ per number. Those who signed up after two months already had around 15zl under the valorisation clauses, now after a year it's something over two grand. On top of that there are problems with the transfer, people are without a phone after a month and in the end it turns out that the worst priorities on the transmitter.

Renewing my contract with PLAY - big mental shortcut, my previous tenants and I had on UPC, the one she was on moved out, then the contract ran out and we took on Play. For now I've rebooted the two routers to factory settings, on TP-Link I've disabled DHCP, Play has a default gateway of 192.168.0.1, Archer C6 192.168.0.2, it's set as an AP, I've named the WiFi networks from both routers the same.

xyzixyqr wrote:

I have named the WiFi networks from both routers the same.

.
Still identical security on both WPA2-AES-PSK (because this TP-LINK does not support WPA3).
For the test too, it's better to give separate SSIDs, because you'll know at a glance what you're connecting to and what you're testing.

IC_Current wrote:

xyzixyqr wrote:

I named the WiFi networks from both routers the same.

Still identical security on both WPA2-AES-PSK (because this TP-LINK does not support WPA3).
For the test it is also better to give separate SSIDs, because you will know at a glance what you are connecting to and what you are testing.

Security separate of course, however what do you mean by test?

xyzixyqr wrote:

Safeguards separate, of course, but what do you mean by test?

If you have an identical SSID, then the security MUST be IDENTICAL. The client saves itself one security setting per SSID. If there are APs with the same SSID and different connection security techniques then clients will not switch between them.
Test - switch manually between different SSIDs and test which AP has stability problems.

IC_Current wrote:

xyzixyqr wrote:

Safeguards separate, of course, but what do you mean by test?

If you have an identical SSID, then the security MUST be IDENTICAL. The client saves itself one security setting per SSID. If there are APs with the same SSID and different connection security techniques then clients will not switch between them.
Test - switch manually between different SSIDs and test which AP has stability problems.

Everything is already working stably, timeouts when pinging are rare, however one of the PCs connects to a PLAY router which is further away and has worse speeds, is there any way to set archer as a priority access point for this PC?

.
Is this OK, or should I choose WPA-2PSK/WPA3-SAE (AES)

xyzixyqr wrote:

Is that OK, or choose WPA-2PSK/WPA3-SAE (AES)

.
I don't think this C6 has WPA3 yet, so just set WPA2 AES PSK alone on both.

xyzixyqr wrote:

PC connects to PLAY's router which is further away and has worse speeds, is there any way to set archer as priority access point for this computer?

It doesn't. There would have to be an AP and a card in the laptop with 802.11k,v,r. Only half-measure is different SSIDs, and then indeed in Windows you can set priorities or manually force SSIDs.

It is still unstable; previously, on a router from UPC, it was much better.

xyzixyqr wrote:

It's still unstable, previously on a router from UPC it was much better

.
But you set up different SSIDs for a while and tested with a forced connection to one AP or the other?

IC_Current wrote:

xyzixyqr wrote:

It's still unstable, previously on the router from UPC it was much better

.
But you set up different SSIDs for a while and tested with a forced connection to one AP or the other?

Yes, there are still timeouts when pinging, admittedly they happen less frequently or a placebo effect (I don't keep exact statistics), but PLAY's router and TPLINK's router still manage to break the connection.

xyzixyqr wrote:

but PLAY's router and TPLINK's router still manage to break the connection.

.
?
https://www.elektroda.pl/rtvforum/topic3158772.html

I just took to testing and diagnostics when it was unstable