Extended Wifi

Access points function different than a router?

Access points set up with the same SSID as your router will act as a bridge to your network, allowing clients to seamlessly switch over to the stronger wifi signal that your access points will broadcast.

They do not act as a bridge. If installed access points will be on the same network, everything else you said is correct.

So I would not actually even need a router? I can pull drops off my 16port switch and use some of those drops as ethernet drops to say my computer, fire tv, xbox, and other similar devices. Then use some of the other drops for access points. Likely dropping each drop over each room that needs wifi. Would it switch between access points seamlessly as you move throughout the house? Or do I have the whole scenario wrong and I do meed the router?

quote:

---

Ubiquiti Access Points

---

whoa..this guy?

LINK

it doesnt do AC or 5ghz though.

quote:

---

whats the optimal setup for say, a router & 2 access points?


just run ethernet from the router to the 2 access points and everyone will continue to share the same SSID? no difference in speed?

---

Long winded and over explained, not necessarily all directed at you, but here for others who may understand less who have a similar question.

It depends on your hardware. If everything uses gigabit Ethernet ports, you'll likely never saturate the lines, regardless of how big of a local file yours playing on however many different devices. You'll probably still not notice a difference with all 100bit ports, but if you use something like a networked TV tuner or a home server to send access to 1080p Blu Ray rips to multiple clients, it may be noticeable. So in this case, all networked equipment involved with gigabit ports would be better. All of them with Fast Ethernet would be very good.

That said, your access point will need to be setup. Essentially every "router" that is available to consumers either has a default AP mode or can be easily turned into an AP by turning off the DHCP server and plugging into the non-WAN ethernet port. You need to name its SSID whatever your standard SSID is. You also should move its IP to a static IP outside the dhcp scope of your dhcp server (main router). That's style points more than necessary, but it's almost essential- it can cause screwups if you don't do it. Now, while configuring this, you're connected via ethernet to the AP. When you change its IP, it's going to reboot and kick you off. You'll have to navigate to the NEW ip that you set in order to see the web console. After all that's done, it should plug and play with no problem.

If you buy a dedicated AP, most of that is done for you. You just navigate to the web console and give it an SSID and static ip, ideally.


Now, back to performance- it's always limited by the smallest available bandwidth. So, if you have 1000bit on one end and 100bit on the other, you'll get 100bit. On most home routers, the advertised port speed is not shared between the (practically standard four) available LAN ports, but gives each port the advertised bandwidth. So when you have an n900 router with gigabit Ethernet sending off 2 cat6 cables to 2 n900 APs, the main router gives you gigabit connection between everything hardwired, 450+450 on 2.4 and 5 ghz bands. Then the APs would each do the same. The bottleneck will be, assuming you could saturate all of that available capacity (you almost couldn't unless you tried to), the n900 connections. If you up it to AC1750 or ac1900, the gigabit Ethernet theoretically could bottleneck it for you. In reality, it's a much more reliable connection and you cannot consistently saturate 1900mbps via wireless to where you'll notice it. Or if you can, please tell me what the hell you're doing. It's probably an attempt to take over the world.

Now, this is all LOCAL access (so playing things in the living room from the plex server in the office, or something like that). Anything that is using Internet access uses these pipes and waves, but the connection to the Internet goes through the main router's WAN (usually gigabit of the LAN ports are gigabit) and into the modem (most docsis 3.0 also use a gigabit port) on down to the cable or phone line, where you are throttled for what you pay for, potentially as little as 3-5mbps (and we are using the same units as 1000mbps which you are getting for in-network stuff. And 5mbps is enough to handle HD video streaming from Netflix, most other internet use aside...just giving you an idea of why I say 100bit is pretty much all that's necessary. You may notice a difference in the upgrade to gigabit, but I wouldn't spend much more on it. Fortunately, gigabit connections are becoming standard on home routers, so it's not usually a stretch to find one cheap. Or, in other words, I'll confuse you and say you may as well just go buy gigabit, mainly because their feature sets are better and they aren't much more expensive. But if you've got, say, an old router from Amazon that had great reviews that only had 100bit ports (had to. Sorry), it would very likely make a fine AP without needing to upgrade to gigabit). Of course, if you're part of a Fiber Internet service, you can pay for up to gigabit connection, but most people don't. And, I believe the number is ~30% that receive <40mbps in their home internet connection.


tl;dr- use 3 identical routers or a router and 2 WAPs with identical specs, and, if you set them up right, you'll switch between them without knowing if and not notice a performance drop. Using old router laying around as AP will probably yield decent results so long as its wireless standard is 802.11n or newer.

ok my head is spinning now.

so answer me this question:

CAD's current router has 2.4 and 5 ghz and both N and AC.

CAD's devices when hooked up to 5ghz (the ones that support it) SCREAM by comparision.

Most of CAD's devices are 'n' at best..the nexus 5 (and maybe nexus 4) devices are AC.

why is everything so slow on 2.4? interference?

at our new house..that wont be an issue i doubt seriously we'll ever see another SSID. we're on 2 acres.

quote:

---

CAD's devices when hooked up to 5ghz (the ones that support it) SCREAM by comparision.

Most of CAD's devices are 'n' at best..the nexus 5 (and maybe nexus 4) devices are AC.

---

1) When you go as far away from the 5GHz connection (or out of where you can actually see it...through 1 wall even) as you can and still catch it, how does it compare to the 2.4?

2) how many devices are concurrently on the 2.4 GHz network vs the 5?


5 definitely has more available bandwidth and better performance on paper in line of sight (same room, can draw line from device to router without hitting anything). It suffers in terms of range and ability to go through walls (same reason that infrared can be seen through a wall, but red, green, and purple cannot...they're all just colors. Long wavelengths "bend" around physical objects better than shorter ones. When talking about frequencies (2.4 GHz and 5 GHz, the higher frequency corresponds to the shorter wavelength).


You could get better results with 2 more AC routers identical to what you've got. But it's probably not worth it once you move congestion off the main router and add the ability to use PoE, letting you run 1 ethernet cable anywhere and being independent of an power cord.

quote:

---

my wife's dad is a network guy and is going to come over to the house with his 'box o cat 5e' and the right tools.

is cat6 or PoE worth it? if i dont do that i'll need to run power to the ubiquiti thingie right?

what do you need to do 'poe'?

---

Power over ethernet is just to be independent of a wall plug at the router. It comes with that device (per a spec sheet on their website I saw, but look into it yourself and don't just take my word for it because it's not advertised on Amazon. And I didn't read all the faq). It's just style points. You can mount it in your ceiling and not need an extension cord or anything crazy run through the attic to get to it.

quote:

---

i'm confused why my laptop runs like shite on 2.4 and scream on 5. its definitely an 'n' card (its 5+ years old) and when signal drops, it jumps to the 2.4ghz network and then its slow as hell.

i know the range is way shorter but could this slow-down also be due to interference from our neighbors?

---

Well, a couple of things. Congestion in your own network (everything on the 2.4 band) + interference from cordless landlines (haha...who owns those?), radios, neighbors all play part. You're doing an unfair comparison though. Compare 2.4 and 5 from the same spot near the router. Your 5GHz band signal dropping could be due to a large physical obstruction (ie- "dead spot") and your 2.4 just happens to have some semblance of a signal there. Compare them head to head, both using speed test and just general use, from the same spot that the 5.0 "screams." I don't see much of a difference myself. At least not enough that I would require 5GHz throughout the house- I'd settle on 2.4 for some of it if the main use had 5 available.