Doug is correct - this is exactly how large offices, stadiums, Home Depot
and other commercial facilities illuminate large/densely populated
environments with good coverage.
His client won't see multiple networks - it will see multiple access points
with the same SSID, and will choose the one that presents the best signal
(with an algorithm that will choose when it is time to move to a different
access point). I do this at work and here at home, and it does not require
anything fancy or special. Wifi networks can achieve optimal client handoff
between access points with the use of central management (like cell phones
do), but it will work very well without it.
Using multiple separate access points will provide the fastest performance
(when a single access point is either not enough to cover a large area or
will have too many clients). Repeaters inherently slow the network down,
because every transmission is repeated on the same channel as the
originating transmission. Just make sure the channels don't overlap with
the different access points (on 2.4GHz, use 1, 6 or 11 - the width of the
signals is wider than the width of the channel). Use a "wifi analyzer" app
on your mobile phone to check which channel is most clear, if you live with
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Doug Braun <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Don't places like large offices, schools, and airports have dozens or
> hundreds of access points with the same SSID?
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Mike Rambour <email@example.com>
> > While its true that any modern device can store access credentials for
> > multiple connections, my house wifi barely reaches the garage, its
> > down to one or 2 bars in the garage and my phone will try and stay
> > connected to it, I have to manually tell it to change to the garage wifi
> > each time I go in the garage. They have different names but I had not
> > thought of making them the same name and will try that, it sounds like it
> > should work but knowing how things work it will likely confuse the phone.
> > In the house my computers are all wired, so no worries about jumping to
> > the weak signal, only my phone and my wife's phone are wifi.
> > mike
> > On 6/16/2015 1:13 PM, David Hillman wrote:
> >> On Tue, 16 Jun 2015, Peter Murray wrote:
> >>> - Configure its SSID and encryption the same as your main access point
> >>> (so
> >>> you can just transparently go from one to the other)
> >> I'm not sure that's a great idea. If the house signal reaches the
> >> shop, even weakly ( or vice versa ), you'll have two networks with the
> >> name available. I bet that'll cause more problems than it'll solve.
> >> Any modern device can store access credentials for dozens of wireless
> >> networks, so there's minimal advantage to naming them the same anyway.
> >> Also, from a troubleshooting perspective, two names would be better.
> >> Say you are in the shop -- or outside on the property -- and your
> >> connection sucks. Unbeknownst to you, your shop WAP crashed, and your
> >> computer jumped to the weak house signal. You won't be able to tell
> >> apart from the client device if they are named the same.
> >> --
> >> David Hillman
> >> _
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation $12.96
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums