Feature Request: 5GHz DFS Channel Support

Adding in my support for this. My home has multiple Access points running at 80Mhz channel bandwidth. Because I have more than two access points, I need to run additional APs on DFS channels to avoid interference between them. Although I know the Roku does not support 80Mhz wide channels, it is beneficial for other devices since they can get off the air sooner, giving breathing room for the Roku to enjoy. I do have a Roku Streaming Stick +.

I also administer a number of apartment building networks, where the building construction and tenant usage patterns (gamers, students, streamers, etc) require a high number of access points, and I run the APs at 40Mhz. Because other apartment complexes are nearby and sometimes tenants bring their own network, I also utilize DFS channels there. The tenants utilize a lot of Roku devices, including ones embedded into TVs, and they are unable to enjoy the performance benefits of having 2/3rds of the 5Ghz spectrum wide open for use. I'm sure many of the existing products can support 5Ghz DFS with a software update, but they may require recertification with the FCC to complete. Either way, one competing device, Apple TV in particular, supports DFS. Most other streaming products like Fire TV, NVIDIA Shield, and Google Chromecast, don't support DFS. This would be one of many ways to differentiate Roku from these other products.

It's worth pointing out that many consumers also use ISP supplied routers and Mesh systems, and many are starting to utilize 5Ghz DFS as the other 5Ghz channels start to get too congested to handle all of the devices, especially in densely populated urban environments. Verizon FiOS is one such ISP whose routers will select DFS channels on a regular basis. Business users with higher end wireless systems will also utilize the DFS channels for performance.

I second that!  Bought 3 roku 4K sticks on Black Friday but went back to amazon fire tv 4K stick because that has proper WiFi channel support.  My understanding It doesn’t even require FCC certification For client devices (only for routers).  And WiFi 6 routers use dfs to reduce congestion in condo complexes etc.  

Ditto, I've tried everything to access the 5ghz band using the two new Premieres I recently purchased. I had bought the two Roku boxes because I prefer the interface. But, now that I realize most of the newer Roku models do not offer 5ghz capability, I'm returning both Roku boxes.

If you, like me, live in an area with a congested 2ghz band (yes, my streaming pauses most evenings for hours on end) you may want to just avoid Roku altogether because nothing can be done about it. 

Thanks Roku, you made my decision to go with a competitor much easier! (Ooop, I guess that's not what a company is supposed to do to stay in business...)

I would like to see DFS support.  My 5GHz band is just as congested as the 2GHz.  My 5GHz is on a DFS channel.  All my devices, except the Roku are on it.

This needs to become a thing, I live in an apartment complex, and there are far too many 5ghz networks around, as well as my internet connection coming in, is operating wireless on a Ubiquity Prism 5, using uni 3 for a clean connection. Uni1 is completely used, which only leaves DFS as the cleanest channels, and Roku doesn't support DFS. This is a HUGE overlook by Roku. Every device I own supports DFS, but not my Roku. I am forced to partially overlap my internet connections frequency, which almost cuts it's throughout by half at times. 

And the lack of any official Roku answers, aren't leaving me with any hope for a fix. No explanation why from Roku wherever you look, just alot of posts about people asking and complaining about the this very issue. You need to answer your customers!

This desires to emerge as a factor, I stay in an condominium complex, and there are a long way too many 5ghz networks round to choose the tool click counter, in addition to my net connection coming in, is operating wireless on a Ubiquity Prism 5, the use of uni three for a clean connection.

While we're at it, why not support the latest protocols (Wi-Fi 6 and 6e)?  I suspect the answer would be "cost-benefit ratio" and I can understand where you might be coming from -- the added cost of using a chipset that supports 6e isn't worth the benefits most users would see from it.  That's OK--that's exactly what a flagship "ultra" model is for -- it's a device with all the bells and whistles that the buyer chooses because they want the best for one reason or another.  And, really, how much extra WOULD it cost per device?  I don't know the answer to that, but I'm guessing it would be under $10 (am I way off?).  There are many users who would pay that because they fall into one of the following:

1. They actually would benefit from upgrade
2. They think they would benefit from the upgrade (whether or not they actually do doesn't matter here--if they think they would and are willing to pay extra for it, that's all that matters)
3. They don't know what it means, but want the best everything

Roku already has a bunch of model options in its line up so leaving the budget models as-is and just adding the upgrade to high-end models shouldn't cause any new issues.