Subject: Re: [Shop-talk] Wifi access point?

From: Doug Braun <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 15:06:15 -0400

I have had one of these for a while, and it has worked fine for me:

http://www.amazon.com/TRENDnet-Mbps-Wireless-Easy-N-Upgrader-TEW-637AP/dp/B00134LUE2

It is cheaper than most other access points, which for some reason are
usually a lot more expensive than routers.

Doug

On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Dave Cavanaugh <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> After getting tired of fooling around with boosters, antennas, etc, I
> finally ran a Cat 6 direct burial cable out to the shop, which is a metal
> pole barn, and being such, relatively impervious to WiFi. That solved the
> problem of connecting my shop computer to the net (but of course raises the
> whole other issue of time wasting net surfing out in the shop...).
>  Anyway, now I could use wifi out in the shop since my iPad and phone can't
> connect to the wifi inside the shop.  I have a four port switch out there I
> am using to connect the computer and my solar panel stuff to, so I have
> room for an access point.  I'm looking for a recommendation for an
> inexpensive, reliable access point; I don't need a booster or range
> extender since it's only got to work inside my 24 x 48 foot shop building.
_______________________________________________

[email-masked]
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive

---

From: Peter Murray <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 15:35:06 -0400

I have a number of access points around the house, because the aluminum
siding and interior ducting wreaks havoc on the wifi signals. Here is what
I would suggest:

- Pick up an inexpensive 802.11n router (like the this Asus:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=33-320-158).
- Disable its DHCP server (so it doesn't conflict with the existing network
- Configure its SSID and encryption the same as your main access point (so
you can just transparently go from one to the other)
- Connect one of its LAN ports (in the Asus, the yellow ports, not the blue
"Internet" port) to the switch in your office - or replace the switch with
the one in the Asus

In fact, if you are using an 802.11b/g AP elsewhere, I would replace it
with the above. 802.11n is a great improvement over 802.11g, and the Asus
is an excellent value.

NFI, just happy with the gear.

-Peter

Thanks

[email-masked]
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/shop-talk/[email-masked]
_______________________________________________

[email-masked]

---

From: Peter Murray <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 15:51:24 -0400

One amendment to my prior email - this Asus RT-N12 router is probably an
even better value. For $10 more, you will get better signal strength and
better performance:

http://amzn.com/B00DWFPDNO

Also, Eric speaks sooth. Ground surges from nearby lightning strikes can
have devastating results on electronics. There are a bunch of power strips
with network/coax/telephone protection, but the specs on the dedicated
protection hardware is much better. I'd put this on both ends:

http://amzn.com/B000BKUSS8

-Peter

On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 3:14 PM, <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Dave C asks about WAP...
>
> Dave, one think to think about (and only because I had this problem will
> ALL my outdoor, direct buried CAT 5 cable.
>
> Make sure that on both sides there is  'surge' like protection.  I've lost
> countless devices till I figured this out.  I ended up going either
> wireless, aerial, or unplug the connections due to this problem.
>
> it's doesn't take much stray voltage (from a lighting strike or something)
> to 'brick' a WEP.
>
> I may be wrong, but that is what I ended up doing to prevent the failures
> I was seeing.
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my Commodore 64 on a 2400 Baud Modem.
> Eric P
> "Be as beneficent as the sun or the sea, but if your rights as a rational
> being are trenched on, die on the first inch of your territory." Ralph
> Waldo Emerson
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.96
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe/Manage:

[email-masked]

---

From: David Hillman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 16:13:54 -0400 (EDT)

> 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 
same 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 them 
apart from the client device if they are named the same.

--
  David Hillman

[email-masked]

---

From: Mike Rambour <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 13:22:42 -0700

While its true that any modern device can store access credentials for 
multiple connections, my house wifi barely reaches the garage, its 
usually 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:
>    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 them apart from the client device if they are named the same.
>
> -- 
>  David Hillman
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/shop-talk/[email-masked]

[email-masked]

---

From: Doug Braun <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 19:02:42 -0400

Don't places like large offices, schools, and airports have dozens or
hundreds of access points with the same SSID?

Doug

On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Mike Rambour <[email-masked]> wrote:

> multiple connections, my house wifi barely reaches the garage, its usually
> 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
>
>
>> shop, even weakly ( or vice versa ), you'll have two networks with the same
>> name available.  I bet that'll cause more problems than it'll solve.
>>
>> _

[email-masked]

---

From: Miq Millman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 17:07:55 -0700

Commercial Wi-Fi environments like airports that have a large area with
contiguous coverage in a single SSID typically have high end equipment that
utilizes Wi-Fi Extender capabilities and are capable of parsing data and
clients between the devices in the network structure without impacting
throughput.

Some systems out there have a mode you can set manually that allows for the
Access Point to be configured as an extender, but be aware that this could
drastically reduce your total throughput of the system (tying up the
limited available channels in 802.11bg 2.4GHz).

A better option may be to use the features in lower quality home market
systems, and have the second device act as a Repeater.  This is also
something that might have to be done manually in the configuration.
Typically this will create a "cloned" network with a new unique SSID that
is served by the original network (including secure access for mac id
limited connections or DHCP).  The benefit is that if you don't actually
roam into an area where the two SSID are identical or similar in strength,
your device will mostly seamlessly transition, and your traffic will not be
limited to sharing channels and handshake contention between the two
SSID's.  You will also be able to run the two different SSID's on different
channels essentially doubling the available capacity instead of sharing it.

--
__
Miq Millman   [email-masked]
Tualatin, OR  Big Llama Productions

On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Doug Braun <[email-masked]> wrote:

> usually
> same
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/shop-talk/[email-masked]

[email-masked]

---

From: Peter Murray <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 22:22:57 -0400

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
nearby neighbors.

-Peter

[email-masked]

---

From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 22:42:56 -0500

> do), but it will work very well without it.

For small and medium sized networks, I've had very good success with
ubiquiti's Unifi stuff.  Bunch of different models, to do different
things, including point to point links and out doors coverage.
Reasonably priced, for good gear.  (The basic 2.4 ghz 802.11n models
are dirt cheap; the rest of the line is just not expensive by the
standards of commerical gear.)

They're just APs, you'd need a dhcp server, router, etc.  There's a
java based management system, which needn't run except when you're
managing them (or if you want to do some stuff that are out of scope
for shop talk.)

The ones at work seemlessly dealt with the switch that several of them
are plugged into failing, falling back into relay over wireless to
stations that still had working ethernet, and dealt with the switch
coming back to life, no problem.

-- 
David Scheidt
[email-masked]

[email-masked]

---

From: David Hillman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 15:13:38 -0400 (EDT)

> hundreds of access points with the same SSID?

    Yes, but that's a different use case.  It's clearly unreasonable to 
expect people to enter dozens of SSIDs and passwords into their device. 
Also, there's probably someone collecting performance metrics on those 
WAPs, who will know if and when there's a problem with one.  And they 
probably have enough overlapping coverage that one failed WAP wouldn't be 
noticable anyway.

    None of that applies to a home installation with two WAPs.  YMMV.

    The 802.11 header includes the MAC address of the WAP.  In other words, 
packets are addressed to a specific WAP, not to the network or by the 
SSID.  If a given device has excessive hysteresis and refuses to switch 
between two networks when the relative signal quality changes, it probably 
won't switch between 2 WAPs on the same network either.  And you'll be 
unable to force it to do so manually.

[email-masked]