Reolink Argus 2E disconnects issue with Deco M4
Hello,
I have an issue with Reolink Argus 2E security cameras, they have very unstable ping and packetloss to Deco M4 mesh, I've searched the forums and i see that there are many users with Argus cameras who complain, with various Deco models,
I have tried all the steps (beamforming, fast roaming, 2.4ghz only guest ssid) as outlined in the other threads,
Must mention that i have >50 other IoT devices and they work just fine, including Xiaomi security cameras, no issues with them, only Reolink Argus has this issue.
as an example - see ping output:
(wired -> reolink)
PING 172.16.1.128 (172.16.1.128): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 172.16.1.128: icmp_seq=0 ttl=128 time=785.5 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.128: icmp_seq=1 ttl=128 time=78.7 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.128: icmp_seq=2 ttl=128 time=2756.7 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.128: icmp_seq=3 ttl=128 time=1734.3 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.128: icmp_seq=4 ttl=128 time=719.2 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.128: icmp_seq=5 ttl=128 time=317.5 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.128: icmp_seq=6 ttl=128 time=128.6 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.128: icmp_seq=7 ttl=128 time=39.9 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.128: icmp_seq=8 ttl=128 time=561.0 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.128: icmp_seq=9 ttl=128 time=274.4 ms
and ping to a cell phone near the camera, connected to the same Deco M4 unit:
PING 172.16.1.122 (172.16.1.122): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 172.16.1.122: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=240.8 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.122: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=196.5 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.122: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=91.5 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.122: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=239.8 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.122: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=160.3 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.122: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=28.1 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.122: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=38.2 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.122: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=46.1 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.122: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=56.2 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.122: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=202.7 ms
clearly there is some issue with Reolink compatibility, how can we get this inspected by firmware team?
