Re: Pre-n or not Pre-n, topology
<[email protected]> Thu, 8 Sep 2005 12:18:04 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.wireless.seattle.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
All the the scenarios involve at least three APs. Since there is a farm there really isn't power inbetween the points for extra APs. Basicly I need to get connectivity out to two remote locations with hopefully wifi access to client devices at those locations in addition to wired ones. Any fill coverage I can obtain inbetween is a bonus. rearden >Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 16:27:25 -0700 >From: Sean Jensen-Grey <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: Pre-n or not Pre-n, topology >To: SeattleWireless Development List <[email protected]> >Message-ID: <[email protected]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > >I might be naive but couldn't you use 3 or 4 WRT54GS nodes in a >mesh back to a common endpoint? > >Wouldn't that get you around obstacles and roaming? And the only >setup is that each AP can see 1 or more APs in the chain. > >Sean > >On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 02:35:49PM -0700, [email protected] >wrote: >> So is it better to use pre-n with stock antennas or 801.11b/g >with >> gain omni antennas? >> >> It makes sense that any variant of beam forming would depend >upon >> antenna separation, polarization, feed line length, etc. But >since >> the Linksys boxes don't use beam forming but just MIMO, then >> antenna placement may not be an issue. >> >> I need to learn a bit about WDS, but with my application should >I >> use WDS or just put the remote APs in bridge mode? It certainly > >> would be nice to have some roaming capabilities between APs, but > >> not necessary. >> >> Does a configuration of: >> point A with gain omni >> point B with directional patch on ant 1 pointed at A and stock >omni >> on ant 2 >> point C with directional patch on ant 1 pointed at A and stock >omni >> on ant 2 >> >> B and C cannot see each other >> A can see B anc C >> >> What settings do I need to have for: client D to connect via B >> (outside of the directional antennas beam, so via the stock >ant2) >> to send traffic to client E via C or to access internet >connection >> fed by A. >> >> Does this cause debillitating hidden node problems? >> Could I plug in wired devices into point B and point C? >> >> Would a better solution be to put two APs at each remote >location >> on different channels? One to bridge to point A (backhaul) and >the >> other to provide wifi coverage a points B and C. What is the >> marginal improvement? it would double my AP cost. >> >> Are there other better topologies? two seperate APs at point A >> pointing at B and C (like sectors)? >> >> Thanks! >> >> rearden >> >> > 1. Re: Pre-n or not Pre-n (Franklin S Werren) >> > 2. RE: Pre-n or not Pre-n (Casey Halverson) >> > 3. Re: Pre-n or not Pre-n (Faisal Rahman) >> > 4. RE: Pre-n or not Pre-n (Dan) >> > 5. RE: Pre-n or not Pre-n (Robert Syputa) Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get secure FREE email: http://www.hushmail.com/?l=2 Free, ultra-private instant messaging with Hush Messenger http://www.hushmail.com/services-messenger?l=434 Promote security and make money with the Hushmail Affiliate Program: http://www.hushmail.com/about-affiliate?l=427 _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/dev