Weapons-grade home WiFi suggestions
Discussion
xeny said:
Evanivitch said:
Recommended cheap and simple Wireless Access Point?
We have a new garden room. CAT6 running in. Power socket near by. Will occasionally be used as an office space for video calling.
We have a new garden room. CAT6 running in. Power socket near by. Will occasionally be used as an office space for video calling.
Something like https://www.amazon.co.uk/TP-LINK-TL-WA1201-AC1200-... ?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/TP-Link-Extender-Repeater...
somouk said:
Anyone using the TP Link Omada equipment for their home network instead of Unifi?
I’m starting the move over when the router arrives tomorrow.
Yeah works fine very unifi like I’m starting the move over when the router arrives tomorrow.
Binned off the Omada router/fw for a home brew pfsence for the stateful fw & vpn options, I suspect most domestic situations will be fine with the Omada router/fw
I must admit, I find it perplexing that people have such complex setups for domestic use. I’ve changed my kit once or twice in the past decade when upgrading from copper to fibre. Takes a little time to get the best from it but once it’s done, I don’t need to touch it. Appreciate we are all different.
wormus said:
I must admit, I find it perplexing that people have such complex setups for domestic use. I’ve changed my kit once or twice in the past decade when upgrading from copper to fibre. Takes a little time to get the best from it but once it’s done, I don’t need to touch it. Appreciate we are all different.
It depends on where you live.I have an 1850s house that is 'L' shaped, over 3 floors plus cellar. Most of the walls are 45 - 50cm thick. It has two outbuildings, one of which contains my office plus the garage, the other was a barn but we're turning it into an annexe containing music room, fitness room, wife's office space etc. The outbuildings are fed by Cat 6, - one AP in the study, 2APs in the converted barn. The main house needs 4 APs to get reliable wifi all over. So I've gone Unifi end to end, security gateway, switches, and APs.
If I lived in a regular modern build using timber frame / stud walls then I wouldn't have gone for anything like this.
had a specialist come to quote for hardwired unifi install today.
He did say that he generally uses cat5e or cat6 cabling... chiefly because it's easier to work with, is less unsightly (for external runs etc) and is fine with gigabit etc. Are there any issues or considerations I need to be aware of there? In theory at least the cabling needs to be the most future proof element.
He did say that he generally uses cat5e or cat6 cabling... chiefly because it's easier to work with, is less unsightly (for external runs etc) and is fine with gigabit etc. Are there any issues or considerations I need to be aware of there? In theory at least the cabling needs to be the most future proof element.
wormus said:
I must admit, I find it perplexing that people have such complex setups for domestic use. I’ve changed my kit once or twice in the past decade when upgrading from copper to fibre. Takes a little time to get the best from it but once it’s done, I don’t need to touch it. Appreciate we are all different.
Usually it's the crap wifi capabilities of the ISP supplied kit that cause issues and make people seek out solutions. My old BT Homehub ran well enough for years but then when I got a newer model, a crap firmware 'upgrade' made the WiFi unstable over time.These days the solution for bad WiFi is pretty simple - a decent mesh setup. They have also come down in price as they have got more popular.
I also run a couple of AV1000 homeplugs so that I can get consistent game streaming from my PC upstairs to my ShieldTV box in the living room.
Magnum 475 said:
wormus said:
I must admit, I find it perplexing that people have such complex setups for domestic use. I’ve changed my kit once or twice in the past decade when upgrading from copper to fibre. Takes a little time to get the best from it but once it’s done, I don’t need to touch it. Appreciate we are all different.
It depends on where you live.I have an 1850s house that is 'L' shaped, over 3 floors plus cellar. Most of the walls are 45 - 50cm thick. It has two outbuildings, one of which contains my office plus the garage, the other was a barn but we're turning it into an annexe containing music room, fitness room, wife's office space etc. The outbuildings are fed by Cat 6, - one AP in the study, 2APs in the converted barn. The main house needs 4 APs to get reliable wifi all over. So I've gone Unifi end to end, security gateway, switches, and APs.
If I lived in a regular modern build using timber frame / stud walls then I wouldn't have gone for anything like this.
In this sort of construction its much better to have many APs dotted around the place - almost one per room - but transmitting on low power - than it is to have one or two centrally located higher power devices, as you'll always be dealing with clients at marginal signal strength which drags everything down with it.
I use 40Mhz channel width as I'm happy with ~300Mbps per client (on a gig symmetric line) knowing that multiple clients can burst that fast simultaneously without interfering with each other if needed, because the AP's all over the house are on non-overlapping channels.
wormus said:
I must admit, I find it perplexing that people have such complex setups for domestic use. I’ve changed my kit once or twice in the past decade when upgrading from copper to fibre. Takes a little time to get the best from it but once it’s done, I don’t need to touch it. Appreciate we are all different.
because it is rare than people are as lucky as you are in the level of results you get with what is a simple setup. New builds are a hall of WiFi mirrors because they use foil backed insulation in the walls to reflect heat, and any other form of radiation.
You may end up with a sheet on each side of an interior wall with foil on both sides of each sheet so you get a strong reflection from the first layer then a bunch of weaker ones, then all that hits another wall, single device can create massive amounts of noise.
if you get a device that pushes the boundaries of the transmission power limits it can basically take out WiFi for everything else in the room.
You may end up with a sheet on each side of an interior wall with foil on both sides of each sheet so you get a strong reflection from the first layer then a bunch of weaker ones, then all that hits another wall, single device can create massive amounts of noise.
if you get a device that pushes the boundaries of the transmission power limits it can basically take out WiFi for everything else in the room.
theboss said:
I moved from a barn conversion with very thick walls to a modern construction and am finding, surprisingly, that transmission of WiFi through walls much worse in the new house. There must be something metallic in the construction. I currently have 7 APs strung up in various places and could probably reduce this by going for ceiling mounting and surveying for optimal placement.
In this sort of construction its much better to have many APs dotted around the place - almost one per room - but transmitting on low power - than it is to have one or two centrally located higher power devices, as you'll always be dealing with clients at marginal signal strength which drags everything down with it.
I use 40Mhz channel width as I'm happy with ~300Mbps per client (on a gig symmetric line) knowing that multiple clients can burst that fast simultaneously without interfering with each other if needed, because the AP's all over the house are on non-overlapping channels.
If the floors are of a traditional wooden boards & joists with a plasterboard ceiling you’ll find that much more wifi ‘transparent’ than the walls. If you can get ap’s into your loft space you’ll find ap’s can cover 2, sometimes 3 floors.In this sort of construction its much better to have many APs dotted around the place - almost one per room - but transmitting on low power - than it is to have one or two centrally located higher power devices, as you'll always be dealing with clients at marginal signal strength which drags everything down with it.
I use 40Mhz channel width as I'm happy with ~300Mbps per client (on a gig symmetric line) knowing that multiple clients can burst that fast simultaneously without interfering with each other if needed, because the AP's all over the house are on non-overlapping channels.
I have a single ap covering a 2 story 3 bed detached with a gf rear extension.
Captain_Morgan said:
theboss said:
I moved from a barn conversion with very thick walls to a modern construction and am finding, surprisingly, that transmission of WiFi through walls much worse in the new house. There must be something metallic in the construction. I currently have 7 APs strung up in various places and could probably reduce this by going for ceiling mounting and surveying for optimal placement.
In this sort of construction its much better to have many APs dotted around the place - almost one per room - but transmitting on low power - than it is to have one or two centrally located higher power devices, as you'll always be dealing with clients at marginal signal strength which drags everything down with it.
I use 40Mhz channel width as I'm happy with ~300Mbps per client (on a gig symmetric line) knowing that multiple clients can burst that fast simultaneously without interfering with each other if needed, because the AP's all over the house are on non-overlapping channels.
If the floors are of a traditional wooden boards & joists with a plasterboard ceiling you’ll find that much more wifi ‘transparent’ than the walls. If you can get ap’s into your loft space you’ll find ap’s can cover 2, sometimes 3 floors.In this sort of construction its much better to have many APs dotted around the place - almost one per room - but transmitting on low power - than it is to have one or two centrally located higher power devices, as you'll always be dealing with clients at marginal signal strength which drags everything down with it.
I use 40Mhz channel width as I'm happy with ~300Mbps per client (on a gig symmetric line) knowing that multiple clients can burst that fast simultaneously without interfering with each other if needed, because the AP's all over the house are on non-overlapping channels.
I have a single ap covering a 2 story 3 bed detached with a gf rear extension.
Captain_Morgan said:
theboss said:
I moved from a barn conversion with very thick walls to a modern construction and am finding, surprisingly, that transmission of WiFi through walls much worse in the new house. There must be something metallic in the construction. I currently have 7 APs strung up in various places and could probably reduce this by going for ceiling mounting and surveying for optimal placement.
In this sort of construction its much better to have many APs dotted around the place - almost one per room - but transmitting on low power - than it is to have one or two centrally located higher power devices, as you'll always be dealing with clients at marginal signal strength which drags everything down with it.
I use 40Mhz channel width as I'm happy with ~300Mbps per client (on a gig symmetric line) knowing that multiple clients can burst that fast simultaneously without interfering with each other if needed, because the AP's all over the house are on non-overlapping channels.
If the floors are of a traditional wooden boards & joists with a plasterboard ceiling you’ll find that much more wifi ‘transparent’ than the walls. If you can get ap’s into your loft space you’ll find ap’s can cover 2, sometimes 3 floors.In this sort of construction its much better to have many APs dotted around the place - almost one per room - but transmitting on low power - than it is to have one or two centrally located higher power devices, as you'll always be dealing with clients at marginal signal strength which drags everything down with it.
I use 40Mhz channel width as I'm happy with ~300Mbps per client (on a gig symmetric line) knowing that multiple clients can burst that fast simultaneously without interfering with each other if needed, because the AP's all over the house are on non-overlapping channels.
I have a single ap covering a 2 story 3 bed detached with a gf rear extension.
Problem is its a fairly big house with a complicated floor plan so even if I can place AP's at the roof level 'beaming down' I will still need quite a few of them spread out horizontally!
Interesting post above (sorry I didn't quote both) also confirming what I suspect about interior wall construction.
One anomaly is that you can have clients talking to an AP through several interior walls, which superficially appears to have a good signal level, but stability is all over the place. So even an aggressive minimum RSSI doesn't help the problem of remaining latched-onto a poorly performing AP.
I'll get there. I don't expect to solve the challenge perfectly overnight.
Evanivitch said:
I was thinking more direct socketed form factor. Any reason to avoid?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/TP-Link-Extender-Repeater...
I tend to go with stand alone units so you can put them higher up and less likely to be lost behind furniture. If you're dealing with a pretty short range requirement socketed should be fine.https://www.amazon.co.uk/TP-Link-Extender-Repeater...
You'd probably get away with https://www.amazon.co.uk/RE220-Universal-Extender-... . Video calling isn't that bandwidth intensive but does benefit from 5GHz connectivity simply to have lower risk of interference causing glitches.
theboss said:
Yes that's exactly what I'm finding... clients on the second floor if losing their nearest AP, will rather connect to another two floors directly beneath, than an adjacent AP on the same level.
Problem is its a fairly big house with a complicated floor plan so even if I can place AP's at the roof level 'beaming down' I will still need quite a few of them spread out horizontally!
Interesting post above (sorry I didn't quote both) also confirming what I suspect about interior wall construction.
One anomaly is that you can have clients talking to an AP through several interior walls, which superficially appears to have a good signal level, but stability is all over the place. So even an aggressive minimum RSSI doesn't help the problem of remaining latched-onto a poorly performing AP.
I'll get there. I don't expect to solve the challenge perfectly overnight.
The trick is that you elevate the ap’s 1-1.5m above the loft floor level, that allows the wifi beam to establish without hitting any walls, almost like a bubble with the ap at the center.Problem is its a fairly big house with a complicated floor plan so even if I can place AP's at the roof level 'beaming down' I will still need quite a few of them spread out horizontally!
Interesting post above (sorry I didn't quote both) also confirming what I suspect about interior wall construction.
One anomaly is that you can have clients talking to an AP through several interior walls, which superficially appears to have a good signal level, but stability is all over the place. So even an aggressive minimum RSSI doesn't help the problem of remaining latched-onto a poorly performing AP.
I'll get there. I don't expect to solve the challenge perfectly overnight.
Even if you mount them directly to the ceiling wifi penetration is still hampered by the wall construction.
somouk said:
Anyone using the TP Link Omada equipment for their home network instead of Unifi?
I’m starting the move over when the router arrives tomorrow.
Yep. I am. Didn't go with unifi and went straight with Omada. Got the OC200 management thing too so I can check on things remotely. The switch is an unmanaged type so I can't set anything but for me it was the access points that I needed to control/monitor.I’m starting the move over when the router arrives tomorrow.
Kit wise I have:
OC200 (cloud controller)
EAP650 x 3 (access point)
AC1200 x 1 (outdoor access point but put in the garage)
TL-SG1218MP (switch)
Blown2CV said:
because it is rare than people are as lucky as you are in the level of results you get with what is a simple setup.
I don’t know, about 3k square feet over 3 floors. I put the APs on the first floor in different places for best results. Ultimately it is trial and error and in at least one place I’ve used a very effective high gain WiFi antenna on my PC. Powerlines rely less on radio for communication between nodes which can help some people.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 4th January 13:45
wormus said:
Blown2CV said:
because it is rare than people are as lucky as you are in the level of results you get with what is a simple setup.
I don’t know, about 3k square feet over 3 floors. I put the APs on the first floor in different places for best results. Ultimately it is trial and error and in at least one place I’ve used a very effective high gain WiFi antenna on my PC. Powerlines rely less on radio for communication between nodes which can help some people.
Edited by wormus on Wednesday 4th January 13:45
Blown2CV said:
wormus said:
Blown2CV said:
because it is rare than people are as lucky as you are in the level of results you get with what is a simple setup.
I don’t know, about 3k square feet over 3 floors. I put the APs on the first floor in different places for best results. Ultimately it is trial and error and in at least one place I’ve used a very effective high gain WiFi antenna on my PC. Powerlines rely less on radio for communication between nodes which can help some people.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 4th January 13:45
Good example - I’ve put my Fritzbox router on its own SSID as it was confusing the switching between APs when moving around the house. So I have one dedicated SSID for my Home Theatre PC with a high gain antenna so it gets 250mb/s across the length of the house. The powerline nodes sit on the first floor, away from anything else which provides best performance. Simple but loads of messing about to find out what works best. Unfortunately as this thread proves, WiFi can be unpredictable.
wormus said:
Blown2CV said:
wormus said:
Blown2CV said:
because it is rare than people are as lucky as you are in the level of results you get with what is a simple setup.
I don’t know, about 3k square feet over 3 floors. I put the APs on the first floor in different places for best results. Ultimately it is trial and error and in at least one place I’ve used a very effective high gain WiFi antenna on my PC. Powerlines rely less on radio for communication between nodes which can help some people.
Edited by wormus on Wednesday 4th January 13:45
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff