Diagnosis with supporting and exclusion evidence
Deterministic rules combine topology, radio path and traffic context. The review exposes contributing signals, ruled-out domains and conditions that would change the result.
Diagnosis decision
The bedroom relay path scores 38/100 and the laptop stayed attached to it despite a materially stronger living-room path.
Upload latency reaches 186 ms during a real-time call while the camera also sends continuous uplink traffic.
Why this diagnosis is credible
Counterfactual reviewWhy not WAN?
ISP gateway latency is 16 ms and WAN loss is 0.1%. Both remain stable while the bedroom path degrades.
Why not router overload?
CPU is 38% and memory is 52%. No forwarding, DHCP, or radio-health fault is present.
Why not firmware?
The firmware cohort's abnormal failure rate is 0.7%, inside its control limit, with no correlated incident spike.
What evidence would change the diagnosis?
Falsification conditionsWAN fault emerges
Gateway loss exceeds 1% across wired and wireless clients, or WAN latency rises above 60 ms.
Router resource saturation
CPU or memory exceeds 85% with correlated forwarding delay and multi-path impact.
Firmware cohort signal
Same release exceeds a 4% abnormal failure rate across comparable CPE cohorts.
Client-only limitation
Other bedroom clients stay healthy and the laptop remains degraded on the strongest path.
Observed signals
6 abnormalRuled-out causes
3 excludedRecommended remediation
2 selectedEscalate to guided placement or technical support with the topology and exclusion evidence attached. Commercial impact must be measured from linked care and dispatch outcomes.