OT: Wireless Range Extenders

[daddyelmis]

I've got a Linksys 802.11b wireless network in the house (3 computers in a peer to peer network).

 

The transmitter is in the top corner of the house, and one of the computers is at the opposite end, downstairs. It's reception is not that great, and because it's in the den, I don't want to put the receiver high up on the wall for aesthetic reasons.

 

Has anyone tried one of those Linksys (or other brand) range extenders? Do they work? I don't really want to upgrade everything to 802.11g.

[ITGITC]

There are a few choices to consider. Of course, height is your friend when it comes to transmission towers (and antennas). And short of relocating the router, or its antenna, to a higher or more centralized area of the house, you can use:

 

1. Antennas that offer more gain. Linkysys makes these. They have 7dBi of gain. They have been on the market a couple of months and are just now coming down in price. I haven't tried them, so I can't give you a recommendation.

 

2. A repeater (or range extender, or expander). This is a good bet because it receives the signal and retransmits it. In your case, that would be on the other side of the house. However, the Linksys model looks like it's made for 802.11g only. Here's a review from Tom\'s Networking on that device.

 

3. a new 802.11g router. In my case, by the time the wireless signal gets from my music room/study to me - on the other side of the house, the signal is low, but still present.

 

However, the speed has dropped from the theoretical 11Mbps to something much slower. With 802.11g you're starting out with a much higher speed; 54Mbps. So if/when the speed drops, it's got a lot farther to go than 802.11b does.

 

Honestly, with all the new varieties of Wi-Fi, including the proprietary speed booster technologies, I'm waiting for the next big thing and the market to settle before I buy additional equipment.

 

 

Here is the latest:

 

MANHASSET, N.Y. The IEEE has begun work on two amendments to the IEEE 802.11 standard for wireless local area networks.

 

IEEE P802.11u, "Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications: IEEE 802.11 Interworking with External Networks," will harmonize the ability of IEEE 802.11 equipment and external networks to work together. The common wireless interworking framework it will provide will include protocol exchanges across the air interface and primitives to support the higher-layer interactions involved.

 

IEEE P802.11v, "Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Network Management," will create a complete and coherent upper layer interface for managing IEEE 802.11 devices in wireless networks. It will allow stations to perform management functions, such as monitoring, configuring and updating, in either a central or distributed manner through a layer 2 mechanism.

 

The standards are developed by the IEEE 802.11 Working Group, sponsored by the IEEE 802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee.

 

===========================

 

Here is a LINK to another interesting story about 802.11 upgrades.

 

===========================

 

And if you're STILL not having fun, check out this story about Netgear's 802.11 Pre-N with speeds up to 108Mbps! Clonk for the story!

 

==========================

 

Since the standards are in such rapid flux, I believe that it makes most sense to hold out as long as you can before making additional purchases to your network equipment.

 

Tom

[Wewus432]

Why not use a Canteena , or you could build one of THESE

[ITGITC]

The Wewus has a very good point.

[videoeditor1]

Check to see if your wireless phone is on the same or adjacent channel as your wifi rig.

 

I can pick up three neighbors. None are closer than 100ft. My wireless rig is in the basement, I get full strength upstairs anywhere. Wireless "B"

[Wewus432]

Yeah, most wireless phones are on the same frequency as WiFi, 2.4 Ghz, so you could get some interference from that while the phone is in use. The newest genertation of wireless phones use the 5.2 Ghz band, and provide longer distance transmissions. A lot of microwave ovens operate at 2.4 Ghz so you could also get some interference between a microwave, and your wireless phone, and/or a WiFi system.

 

I'm sure you know I wasn't suggesting you tap into someone else's WiFi network. That Chinese cookware antenna would probably give you plenty of gain for your network, and you could put it anywhere in the room, or even in the room above with some drilling, and disguise it as something else. I'd just set it on a table, near the computer and throw a big scarf over it.

[ITGITC]

Naaaah. No one is suggesting that anyone tap into an open network without the owner's permission. However, there are many municipalities that are offering free admission to their networks. In fact, I read a few months ago that the National Mall in Washington, DC was to be blanketed with repeaters. You will be able to sit on a park bench, open your notebook, and surf the web with no problems. Can anyone verify if this is operational?

 

This technology is what intrigues me. Many major hotel chains are putting these tiny repeaters within the ceilings of each floor. Why can't we figure out who is offering this technology and use it around our house?

 

The Pringles can Wi-Fi antenna is very directional and could be awkward to use. It would be better to get the specs to build a decent omni-directional antenna plus a repeater and mount that in the attic or somewhere out of site.

 

Tom's Hardware.com has a neat article about putting a plug-in Wi-Fi radio in a laptop that did not come equipped with one. Basically, you purchase the module off the web, or unplug the module from an old Wi-Fi router, disassemble the laptop and plug the module in. Connect the antenna cables and reassemble.

 

Here\'s the link to that article.

 

I'm getting off-topic, but it seems to me with a few web searches and a little ingenuity, you should find a solution to your coverage problem through repeaters, antennas, or both.

 

Tom

[Wewus432]

Hey Tom, I think I showed you THIS , didn't I?

 

You can build a very large WiFi network, very cheaply using that software, and some of the hardware we've been talking about.

 

A Mesh network makes each computer in the network a reciever, and a repeater. It works. The cool thing would be to combine that Mesh network with some Voice Over IP technology.

[ITGITC]

I had not seen that, Mr. Wewus. Thanks for pointing it out. I'll read more of it tonight.

 

Tom

[Wewus432]

posted by TommyBoy:

The Pringles can Wi-Fi antenna is very directional and could be awkward to use. It would be better to get the specs to build a decent omni-directional antenna plus a repeater and mount that in the attic or somewhere out of site.

Since you know exactly where the source is, I don't see how the directionally would be a problem with The Cantenna. You just point it right at the source.

 

However, the greatest advantage to using a USB antenna is the ability to use long cable runs from the computer to the antenna without signal loss. Maybe the most direct way to fix daddyelmis's problem would be to just buy a USB adapter, then route an extended cable close enough to the Network access point to get a good signal. No Chinee' cookware involved.

 

See what I'm saying? Buy a USB adapter, then put an extension on the cable, and put the adapter where it needs to go to get a good signal.

[ITGITC]

Yup.

 

Well, I'm all over the house with my laptop. So the Pringles can is too directional.

 

I've never tried the USB idea. Two questions come to mind:

 

1. What's the maximum length of the USB cable?

 

2. Would there be interference introduced by the long cable run?

 

3. I'm not sure about other problems that might be introduced by using USB as an interface. I was told by my PhD friend who made the Pringles can antenna to stay away from USB interfaces when networking. Something about the conversion and packets and timing. I don't know for sure. When he said that a direct interface into the PCI bus would give me fewer problems, that's the advice I took. My kids' desktops have Linksys 802.11b PCI interfaces. My laptop has a Linksys 802.11g card plugged into the side. My desktop is connected to the router via a network cable.

 

I wonder if anyone here has experience with the USB/802.11b interface?

[Wewus432]

A USB interface has less throughput than a PCI interface, yes, I think it's 20% to 30% less, correct me if I'm wrong, but my point about USB interfaces is, you can have very long cable runs without signal loss. I don't know what the limits are on that, but you can go up to 15 metres without any signal loss at all. That's a long way. You can't do that with a PCI interface. A 15 metre cable run would noticeably attenuate your signal.

 

A Canteena would be a little more awkward to use on a laptop, sure, BUT, you get a lot more gain, and therefore a lot more range than you would from any kind of built in omni antenna.

 

The directionality isn't a factor, if you're at home. You know where your access point is, you're probably going to be sitting in one place to use your computer, you just point the antenna until you get a good signal. It's not like you're going to be running around in your backyard using your laptop, are you?

 

Of course you'd have to perch the Canteena somewhere to use it, so you have to weigh the convenience of an omni antenna, against the high gain of the Canteena, or the Chinese cookware antenna.

[ITGITC]

Originally posted by TheWewus:

A USB interface has less throughput than a PCI interface, yes, I think it's 20% to 30% less, correct me if I'm wrong, but my point about USB interfaces is, you can have very long cable runs without signal loss. I don't know what the limits are on that, but you can go up to 15 metres without any signal loss at all. That's a long way. You can't do that with a PCI interface. A 15 metre cable run would noticeably attenuate your signal.

Steve - Let's get something straight... We can talk about theory all day long. The deciding factor is going to be how all this operates in the real world. Will you agree with that?

 

If so, let me reiterate what my friend said. First, a little background: Bill has a PhD in engineering and was in charge of Information Technology at North Carolina State University for years and years. He knows what he's talking about. My information is coming from him.

 

When I set up my home network, I was contemplating the use of a Wi-Fi adapter that uses a USB connection for one of the kid's desktops so that I could position the antenna in an optimum fashion, just like you and I discussed.

 

Bill said that a direct injection into the PCI bus LIKE THIS LINKSYS CARD was simpler (electronically) than using a USB interface to connect to the USB Wi-Fi Adapter . Because of this simplicity, he recommended that I stay away from the Wi-Fi 802.11b USB interface. I took his advice and bought the PCI card. It works like a charm. Also FYI, I've never seen a Wi-Fi adapter that connects to a PCI interface through a cable.

 

 

Originally posted by TheWewus:

A Canteena would be a little more awkward to use on a laptop, sure, BUT, you get a lot more gain, and therefore a lot more range than you would from any kind of built in omni antenna.

 

The directionality isn't a factor, if you're at home. You know where your access point is, you're probably going to be sitting in one place to use your computer, you just point the antenna until you get a good signal. It's not like you're going to be running around in your backyard using your laptop, are you?

 

Of course you'd have to perch the Canteena somewhere to use it, so you have to weigh the convenience of an omni antenna, against the high gain of the Canteena, or the Chinese cookware antenna.

Excellent points indeed!

 

And there lies the rub.

 

You see, that laptop is all over the house. We use it in the living room, the dining room table, the kitchen, the den when we're watching TV... And yes, we even sit on the deck and use it when it's nice outside.

 

To have a Pringles can antenna attached to the laptop instead of the card it uses now would be awkward - especially since I'm not the only one using the laptop. My wife and daughters also use it... all the time. I don't think they would want the hassle of messing with a Pringles can antenna.

 

Regarding the directionality factor - well, I just don't know because we're talking theory. Bill built one. He said that it was VERY directional and if there was an obstacle (a few trees, for instance) between the two systems, it wouldn't work. Of course, he was talking about the distance from the pool to his house. But nevertheless, I don't have experience with the Pringles can antenna, so it doesn't make sense to argue the point. Does it? Besides, it wouldn't be practical for the family to use anyway.

 

We've gone a bit off-tangent here with this discussion, but it's been a lot of fun. I hope that there will be some people who will add their experiences to this thread because that will make it that much more informative.

 

Thanks for all the links and information, Steve!

 

Tom

[Dave The Rave]

I have seen the insides of one of those Linksys WLAN range extenders. IMO they aren't all they are cracked up to be.

 

For starters, you will lose your spacial antenna selection diversity gain using it. The unit transmits on one antenna and receives off the other. So, the deadspots around your house will be larger (in area) and more pronounced than before.

 

For seconds, the power amp in them is only transmitting around 20dBm (100mW) for .11b and around 17dBm (50mW) for .11g. While this may be a small improvement on some older WLAN models, this is about the same as you'd get from a new "high-power" WLAN router/card out of the box (AND it'd have antenna selection diversity).

 

All things considered, my professional advice would be to spend your money on a) slightly better antennas and/or b) a newer WLAN router box.

 

Thanks for asking

 

:DTR

[ITGITC]

Hey Dave, THANKS for your input.

 

And Mr. Wewus - I didn't mean to sound strident in my last message. It came out wrong. My apologies.

 

This is just interesting stuff to me. Dave, you had a great idea of taking an old antenna that someone had used for satellite TV and converting it for use with 802.11. If you have any links that might give us additional insight into that project, I would appreciate them.

 

One of the members of our neighborhood swim club says he doesn't have a problem with us tapping into his broadband connection from the pool. It's just a matter of setting something up that would reach the length of a small city block, then making the signal available to a few people working on their laptops at the pool.

 

I've got an old PC that a friend at work gave me to refurbish and donate to the public school. I added some RAM, a network card, and replaced the CD-ROM. It's old, but good enough to surf the net. I'd kinda like to donate it to the pool so that the folks in the hut can keep an eye on the weather radar. My wife thinks that's a really stupid idea. Maybe it is & the kids would quickly tear it up.

 

But it would also be nice to offer wi-fi to the parents who bring their kids to the pool on a Saturday, but need to work on their laptop. (There's a hut with picnic tables that offers shade.) Does that sound stupid too? Probably. However, I think that with the folks we've got in this area (Research Triangle Park, NC), there would be quite a few who would take advantage of this. Oh... and, we're not rich. This would certainly be a home-grown effort.

 

So laugh if you want, but I'm interested in learning more about how to make it feasible to offer wi-fi from a block away. Thanks for any help/advice/links you can offer.

 

Thanks,

 

Tom

[Dave The Rave]

No links, sorry Tom. I have a bunch of old dishes in my back yard though, so I'll give it a try sometime and report back here. Don't hold your breath though, I'm in the process of moving my studio upstairs to a much bigger room - that gets priority right now!

 

:DTR

[ITGITC]

Thanks for your reply, Dave. Ummm, when you get a chance, post some pictures of your new studio. I know all of us would love to see them!

 

Take care,

 

Tom

[Charlie-brm]

OK, I give up.

After 3 days of discussion avoiding it, what IS the typical range of a wireless network in a house - in feet?

[ITGITC]

Originally posted by Charlie-brm:

OK, I give up.

After 3 days of discussion avoiding it, what IS the typical range of a wireless network in a house - in feet?

It depends. What's your shoe-size?

 

If the transmitter (router) is located upstairs rather than downstairs and is in the center part of the house, and if the house has a wooden frame (as opposed to a steel-framed office building), then it should cover most of an average-sized (2,000 Sq. ft) house.

 

But, this varies by brand. I'll see if I can find reviews over at cnet.com or pcmagazine.com to give you better statistics.

 

How big is your house? Where do you plan to mount your router? Do you have any cordless phones or microwave ovens that might interfere with it?

 

I can set up a PC with a Linksys 802.11b wi-fi card installed in a PCI slot with Windows XP on my dining room table and scan for available access points. Windows will find mine, my neighbor's behind me, and my neighbor's across the street (and down 2 houses). And, if they weren't locked, I could probably surf the 'net from either one.

 

So unless you've got lots of walls between your router and your receiving machine, and unless you've got devices that may intefere with the 2.4GHz frequency, you should be in good shape.

 

However, YMMV.

 

Good luck!

 

Tom

[zeronyne]

I use B in the the house (the transmitter is in the basement office) and it craps out at the opposite end from the hub. I alleviated this problem by using a little device that transmits 10baseT through your AC outlets, and added another wireless access point at the other end of the house.

[ITGITC]

Originally posted by zeronyne:

I use B in the the house (the transmitter is in the basement office) and it craps out at the opposite end from the hub.

Yeah. But what you didn't mention is that you are a forum celebrity who lives in a brand new 10,000 Square Foot house in the 'burbs of Chicagoland.

 

...So, Fess Up 0-9!

[daddyelmis]

Well, interesting discussion. Reinforces that there is not a consensus on what will or won't work "better." Certainly upgrading the entire network to "g" is one approach, but not the preferred one because I don't want to drop that dough while the whole technology is in flux (as was mentioned in an earlier post).

 

I am using the Linksys USB receivers because I wanted what I perceived was more flexibility in moving the receivers around (as compared to the PCI cards).

 

I think my den computer problem is that it is diagonally opposed to the transmitter, and the main structural walls of the house are between it and the transmitter. My laptop in the music room, which is also downstairs but on the same side of the house as the transmitter has no problems.

 

I've looked into the pringles can, but my problem (I believe) is more "blocked line of sight" related. I can easily get 2 neighbor's networks downstairs (they are not WEP'd, mine is). This reinforces my thought that I have a physical interference problem.

 

Hence my thoughts on the repeater/extender. I would have just Cat 5'd the house but running cable in a 2 story house is zero fun and quite difficult.

 

So, I may just wait for one the extenders to get cheap on eBay and give that a gamble. Ultimately, I'll likely upgrade to a higher protocol system once that shakes out a bit more.

 

As always, great discussion and insight, folks.

[Jon Doe]

Daddyelmis,

 

If your house has steel studs in the walls they will ground out the radio signal pretty quick. Idealy you would put you WAP in the middle of the area in which it will be used instead of on the edge of it. I use the Linksys extenders and am happy with them.

[videoeditor1]

I have my "B" router in the den on the 1st floor on the north end of my house.

 

I get full strenght everywhere. Upstairs, downstairs, southend...I even get 2MB 75 feet away at the end of my driveway.

 

I GET 1MB from two neighbors who are no less than 100feet away!

 

I have three wireless phones (same system) on 2.4GHZ, two microwaves etc etc.

 

'Drew

[videoeditor1]

I have my "B" router in the den on the 1st floor on the north end of my house.

 

I get full strength everywhere. Upstairs, downstairs, southend...I even get 2MB 75 feet away at the end of my driveway.

 

I GET 1MB from two neighbors who are no less than 100feet away!

 

I have three wireless phones (same system) on 2.4GHZ, two microwaves etc etc.

 

'Drew

[offramp]

I recently saw a website that offered extension antennas for laptops, for around $70. They clip on to the screen top.

[deanmass]

How about running a piece of CAT5?? Wireless is nice,easy, but a piece of cable is always better if you can run it.

[Wewus432]

True, after all this wireless talk, running Cat5 is the best solution for secure networking, in any case, if you can accomplish it. I think 100 meters is the limit on those cable runs without significant signal loss.

 

To run a cable from a second floor, to a first floor you need some specialty tools, and it's almost easier to route your cable outside and bring it back in, or under the first floor, rather than try to route directly from the first floor to the second, depends on the way the walls run. You don't want a cable coming out in the middle of the ceiling.

 

That repeater solution is looking good about now.

[deanmass]

Running a cable is nearly always do-able, but sometimes just not worth the fuss. I find many times that there is some type of existing pathway to get the cable down or up through the levels (duct work-chimneys) but the outside in things works too. 334 feet (100 meters) is the cat 5 limit without dropping packets. I am kind of messed up, but I actually enjoy running cable. You put it in and bam...fast, stable..

[ITGITC]

CLONK HERE for a new article from CNET.COM regarding this question.

 

Tom