Wireless G devices on a N network

Sully

A quick question. For a guest house, we have a wireless G router which has gone to pot and needs replacing. I intended on replacing it with a N type router but I understand that G type devices operating on the N network will slow down all other devices, even if they support N.

So I am left with the dilemma: Invest in a G router because its going to be a mixed bag, or go with N and eventually more devises will support N.

Any thoughts?

PogMoThoin

It'd be madness not to go with "N", in time you won't have any "G" devices.

Can I recommend an amazing router
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79956379&postcount=27

See this thread on how to configure it
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056718566

BTW, Wireless "N" is now being outdated by wireless "AC", the devices are starting to appear, laptop wifi cards don't support it yet though
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11ac

FoxT

OP,
I'm in a similar position to yourself, and have been doing a bit of research.

Here is where I am at so far.

I agree that you should consider getting an N router. However, not all 'N' devices are created equal.

All G devices MUST operate in the 2.4 GHz band. N devices MUST operate here, and N devices MAY also operate in the 5GHz band.

This means you can get single-channel N router, (2.4GHz only) or a dual - channel N router. (can work in 2.4GHz and also work at 5GHz AT THE SAME TIME)

A dual-channel N device is more expensive, but is potentially far superior to a 2.4GHz -only unit. The advantage is as follows:

- You can have 2 wireless networks operating independently at the same time (one at 5GHz, to cater for your n-capable clients, and one at 2.4GHz for your b/g clients) Assuming you have at least some N clients, This will reduce the load on your 'g' network & so should improve performance.

- you can then keep your n & b/g clients separate, (separate SSIDS, separate passwords, is one way) which offers a degree of loadsharing between the 2 networks.

Note that 5GHz may not have the same range as 2.4GHz, but from what I have read, I expect that in practice they will be similar , as the 5GHz channel is less congested/prone to interference.

802.11ac is better again - but there are no client cards available yet, and also the std is still not finalised apparently.

You can get a well-regarded ac unit here for about eu170 + shipping:
http://lb.hardwareversand.de/Router/60108/ASUS+RT-AC66U+AC1750+Gigabit+WLAN+Router.article


At this point I am looking at a dual-channel 802.11n unit , like this bad boy for eu130.

http://lb.hardwareversand.de/Router/52597/Asus+RT-N66U+N900.article

Regards,

FoxT

FoxT

PogMoThoin wrote: »

It'd be madness not to go with "N", in time you won't have any "G" devices.

Can I recommend an amazing router
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79956379&postcount=27

Pog, a quick question - how does the 30dBm Tx power help, when the clients are (presumably ) still limited to the standard power level?

Thx

PogMoThoin

FoxT wrote: »

Pog, a quick question - how does the 30dBm Tx power help, when the clients are (presumably ) still limited to the standard power level?

Thx

Yes, the signal level will be higher, therefore they'll transfer at a higher rate.

The range and penetration of 5Ghz is half that of 2.4Ghz, it will be great in the same room, but poor through any sort of obstacle. It should be used to free up using 2.4, but I wouldn't like to have a device limited to it.

Sully

Got myself a dual band router but Komplett take ages to send it out. I assume it operates two SSIDs/networks for the different frequencies and its not automatic? Its a public WiFi network so one would assume that people wont have a clue if they have a G or N device!

FoxT

If the device is G-only, then they wont even see the 5GHz SSID...they'll just see 1 network.
If the client is g/n, then they will see both. You could name the SSIDs so thst it is obvious to g/n users which one to go for...

FoxT

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Yes, the signal level will be higher, therefore they'll transfer at a higher rate.

The range and penetration of 5Ghz is half that of 2.4Ghz, it will be great in the same room, but poor through any sort of obstacle. It should be used to free up using 2.4, but I wouldn't like to have a device limited to it.

I can see how the downstream transmissions would be faster (fewer uncorrectables etc) but in a bad RF environment , upstream performance could be poor ( I am thinking of ACKs etc) , right? Also, wouldnt a 1W + EIRP interfere with/swamp other neighbouring wifi networks?

PogMoThoin

Upstream would be the same rate as downstream.It's half duplex, it uses the same spectrum to transmit and receive, one way at a time

Yeah, a 1 watt router would prob cause problems for your neighbours, just as well I have none. Choose your channel wisely

FoxT

Hmmm, 1W router here would have my neighbours picketing me!
I have spent a bit of time reading papers on 5Ghz (802.11n/ac) & 60Ghz (802.11ad) propogation & have come to the reluctant conclusion that I need to do some cabling...ie place APs at 3-4 different places around the home, use 802.11n 5GHz for short range channel separation....

It seems to me that IEEE are trying to maximise headline Mbits/sec, at the expense of range. I think they are taking the wrong approach.

For example, an MPEG4 HDTV signal consumes just 15Mbits/sec. For Video/IP applications then a typical home will not need more than 100Mbits/sec ( say 3 x 15Mbits for HDTV + 20Mbits for gaming+ 35Mbits for whatever)

That is 2 x 802.11g channels....and it will be a looong time before I have an aggregate of 100Mbits to the home!

PogMoThoin

FoxT wrote: »

Hmmm, 1W router here would have my neighbours picketing me!
I have spent a bit of time reading papers on 5Ghz (802.11n/ac) & 60Ghz (802.11ad) propogation & have come to the reluctant conclusion that I need to do some cabling...ie place APs at 3-4 different places around the home, use 802.11n 5GHz for short range channel separation....

It seems to me that IEEE are trying to maximise headline Mbits/sec, at the expense of range. I think they are taking the wrong approach.

For example, an MPEG4 HDTV signal consumes just 15Mbits/sec. For Video/IP applications then a typical home will not need more than 100Mbits/sec ( say 3 x 15Mbits for HDTV + 20Mbits for gaming+ 35Mbits for whatever)

That is 2 x 802.11g channels....and it will be a looong time before I have an aggregate of 100Mbits to the home!

Why do you want to stream video over wireless? That's madness. Run cat 5 cables to everything static, they do gigabit, leave the wireless just for mobility.

FoxT

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Why do you want to stream video over wireless? That's madness. Run cat 5 cables to everything static, they do gigabit, leave the wireless just for mobility.

Every wifi youtube client runs video over wireless!

In due course, youtube, RTE player, BBC player, etc, will all be running HDTV. The next TV that I buy will probably have an RJ45 & no UHF connector. ( There is a shift in the Broadband industry from MPEG TS'es to xDSL/DOCSIS/eDOCSIS video over IP, but it'll take afew years for that to percolate down to CPE's..) In the meantime, there will probably be an mpeg5 that will offer further coding gains. My point is - if you have 2-3 orthogonal wifi services in your home, with each offering a genuine 30Mbits/sec, then that will see you out.

In the meantime, IEEE/wifi are focusing on headline bps numbers instead of orthogonality.
I agree with you that 5GHz won't have the range & 60 GHz (802.11ad) will be even worse. I'd rather cable up say 3 of 802.11g APs in my home than 5 of 5GHz APs, or 10 of 802.11ad APs...

PogMoThoin

Yeah, but why would you want to setup those devices now? You never know what's around the corner, technology is always evolving, even surprising us. Just run the cables for now.

Which router did you go for Sully?

Sully

It was a tough call. I looked up as many reviews as possible and there was one router (cant recall the name) which I had decided to go with but there were reviews that it kept disconnecting. While there were the odd reports it was fixed in a firmware upgrade, I didn't want to take a chance and went with a router which also got very good reviews. I avoided Linksys as the reviews seem very poor so I am ditching my existing WRT54g for this baby;

ASUS RT-N65U 450 Mbps Dual-Band Wireless Router Gi 4 Ports Gigabit Switch - 1x USB3.0

For us, its both speed and range. Its a big house and the router is beside the cordless phone and near to the kitchen with two fecking microwaves. Its also in a room with a concrete wall. A right mess.

I have come to the conclusion I wont have much of a choice but to throw in a few extender around the place to boost the signal. Once the router comes, ill set it up and re-test the signal around the place before deciding what goes where. I currently have a Belkin dual band extender operating to keep the signal coming from the main house to the out house where my computer is. Its good enough, but nowhere near as good as the old Linksys extender which isn't on sale anymore afaik.

PogMoThoin

Don't use extenders (repeaters), an extender will half the throughput of your wireless network. It's that half duplex issue, when it recieves a packet it must then transmit it again, can't do both at same time. Run a cable and use an access point.

Sully

Running a cable is out of the question sadly!

PogMoThoin

Sully wrote: »

Running a cable is out of the question sadly!

Homeplugs then, it's better than repeating

FoxT

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Don't use extenders (repeaters), an extender will half the throughput of your wireless network. It's that half duplex issue, when it recieves a packet it must then transmit it again, can't do both at same time. Run a cable and use an access point.

+1 on that. I have been using an extender, and it is a pain. I am finally about to bite the bullet & spend a day running ethernet cables around the house...My research on n/ac/ad technologies indicate that if anything range of future wifi standards will fall significantly.

-FoxT

FoxT

Well, I've done a bit of homework here....looked at homeplugs ...then ... swapped my 11g router for a basic (2.4G only) 11n, then made the 11g box into an AP.
I found this very useful...
http://www.speedguide.net/articles/how-to-set-a-wireless-router-as-an-access-point-2556


So anyway, An ethernet cable costs about a tenner, a pair of homeplugs costs a lot more! So my plan is

- Bite the bullet & run 4 Cat6'es from my main 11n wifi router in the attic to 4 different points around the house.
- 2 of these cat6'es will plug directly into desktop PCs
- The other 2 will light up 2 routers in AP mode - so in-room 11g plus opportunity to plug up to 4 devices into the AP via RJ45.

11g same-room performance is about 20Mbits. This is plenty for what I want.

Might sound like overkill, but we have 2 desktops, 4 laptops, an ipad & sundry other wifi devices in the house! UPC are giving us 30Mbits but our current infrastructure is bottlenecking it.



-John

FoxT

PS

Sully, I am considering getting a dual-band router...how do you find the 5GHz performance vs 2.4? Thanks

PogMoThoin

Homeplugs are half duplex just like wireless, it's a radio signal over you copper wire. They can be convenient for where you can't run cables but a cable will always be better.

Sully

Got the router today but its asking for our internet connection type, which I thought was odd seeing as its just plugged directly into the modem by Ethernet and doesn't cater for the telephone connection. Normally such routers just pick up the internet and away it goes (bar the various settings for the wireless network).

Anyway, no fear, selected PPoE and gave the user/pass after a few days of trying UTV to get the info. Got it this evening, but the router just brings me back to the page to select my connection type. No way around it. Tried calling Tech Support for Asus, closed till tmrow. Online IM chat is always saying their "Engineers" are busy.

Ah well. Will see what Asus say tmrow if I get through. So much for their 30 second configuration they advertise with a video on their website! :pac:

FoxT

Suddenly realised my post was wrong & potentially misleading.....

PogMoThoin

If it's UTV it's DSL broadband from the phone line. You have two choices, route twice, (meaning the Asus must be in a different subnet) or you will need to login to the UTV modem and set it as a bridge and enter the PPPoE details for UTV on the Asus for it to do the dialling. The latter is the better option as you never want double NAT, it causes too many complications. Either way you will have to connect to the existing modem by ethernet. What modem do you have?

onedmc

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Can I recommend an amazing router
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79956379&postcount=27

My wireless device sits at crotch level under the desk - I fear that a full 1 watt will cook me good. not licensed in the US - ouch

PogMoThoin

onedmc wrote: »

My wireless device sits at crotch level under the desk - I fear that a full 1 watt will cook me good. not licensed in the US - ouch

Why have you a wireless device under a desk? It would make it pretty pointless to buy a 1Watt router and keep it under a desk. Move it out, wireless needs to be unobstructed for the waves to have full strength and coverage, hiding it under the desk is blocking it.