Advice and clarification on Mesh vs Extenders vs APs

[zecax]

hi all, first post here.

My current setup is as follows:
ISP wifi router on 192.168.0.xxx
My own Linksys 1900ACS on 192.168.Y.xxx

I have Cat6 cable covering the entire house, so I can place wired devices virtually anywhere I want.

Walls are all masonry/brick.

that's it.
Most devices around the house, like printers, STB, NASs, PC, etc have static IP addresses on the home 192.168.Y.xxx range.

The wireless coverage of the Linksys is bad - it covers about 1/2 of the house (200 sqm).

I'd like to extend the wireless range with minimum changes to the current setup. Having top wireless speed isn't a real concern - I'd be happy with 100mbps, as long as it's stable.

I'm undecided between these 3 solutions:
1-adding one of the recent "seamless" extenders that allow the use of a single ssid
2-Buying a mesh system
3-simply placing an older 2.4GHz Netgear router at another end of the house as an AP.

From what I have read, it seems that the simplest solution is #1, ie to buy an extender (like the Netgear EX2700 (aka X6?)) and wiring it at the other end of the house (or even in the middle, as it seems to have much better range than the Linksys 1900ACS). No changes to the 1900ACS settings, same subnet range, just plug & play.

2-Mesh system - probably an Orbi RBK20 set? My first question is whether I could keep the wired part of the 1900ACS as is, turning the wifi off, and having the mesh wifi in my current home network range 192.168.Y.xxx. Does the mesh wifi range have to be outside my home network range?
Can I keep the 1900ACS as the default gateway and use its network as the (wired) backhaul for the mesh units?

1.5- Can I buy a single Orbi RBS20 unit and start using it as 1-node mesh just for the wifi - perhaps it would be enough to cover the whole house if placed in the centre?
This way I would keep initial outlay low and could later build upon it, by buying a 2nd Orbi unit.
Alternatively, can the Orbi RBS20 be used as a seamless extender (like the EX2700)?

3-Setting an older router up as a separate AP would be simple enough and has the advantage of allowing an extra 4 wired ports wherever I place it - ie it would work as an AP+4-port switch. On the other hand, having a new SSID is a problem for some devices when moving around the house, as they don't automatically switch over to the strongest signal.

What is your recommendation?

 

[ACwifiguy]

Option 3- is by far the best bang for buck

On that old router turn off DHCP and set it’s lan address to 192.168.0.2. Instead of plugging in to the wan port, plug in to a lan port. Set the wireless SSIDs to be the same as your Linksys, use a non overlapping channel. Your devices will negotiate the best signal and all devices will be on the same network.

 

[zecax]

Option 3- is by far the best bang for buck

On that old router turn off DHCP and set it’s lan address to 192.168.0.2. Instead of plugging in to the wan port, plug in to a lan port. Set the wireless SSIDs to be the same as your Linksys, use a non overlapping channel. Your devices will negotiate the best signal and all devices will be on the same network.

I did just that.
Put a Netgear WNDR4500 at the other end of the house. Same SSID as the original 2.4 and 5GHz, disabled DHCP and it's working brilliantly.
With both routers placed at opposite ends of the house, the Netgear was offering better coverage in roughly 60% of the house, vs about 40% for the Linksys. Then I moved the Netgear a bit closer to the centre (but still in the same room) and it's now roughly 70/30 for the Netgear.
And to think that I originally bought the Linksys hoping to get better coverage than what the Netgear was giving me...

Anyway, thanks for your advice - this solution is perfect for my needs.

About my original questions, and just for clarification on mesh configurations/flexibility, if I had gone for an Orbi mesh, would it have to work on a different LAN range, or could it stay on the same range as the wired network?
And could the existing wired network be used for backhaul?

 

[ACwifiguy]

Glad it worked great for you!

They can all be bridged to be on the same lan using a similar technique.

Adding more... It comes down to how much roaming do you do and does that roaming exchange cause any performance degradation. If there are no obvious roaming issues with what you have now I wouldn’t expect a major improvement going to a system because clients drive roaming, not the system. Mesh systems tend to use 2x2 radios or other cheaper hardware - meshes by definition are for wireless based backhaul - because you have a wired backhaul I would keep with your current radios which likely have equal performance to a mesh node (or better since they are wired backhaul).

There is such thing as too many radios for a space - clients will stick to radios (the farther radio) when radios are too close together to encourage a roaming event. It is good to have a little overlap but not too much saturation.

 

[Trip]

Great that you got it handled well enough.

Beyond what you already have, any further improvements via a wifi system would mostly be found in the management experience and/or certain connection quality aspects, roaming potentially included. With roaming, for example, the clients do dictate much of the experience, yes, but the wifi system itself (or lack of one) can still play a large role, when, for example, proper 802.11k/r/v and/or real-time channel/power adjustment and/or client load-balancing intelligence are all lacking or outright missing -- ie. most of the AIO "mesh" add-ons, most whole-house products, even many SMB systems. I wish that wasn't the case, but it is what it is, and is yet another reason why, for certain scenarios, there is still no substitute for full-blown enterprise gear, and why some still prefer it even for simpler topologies (myself included) versus the consumer/SMB stuff.

But this thread is about your actual needs, and for all the fancy features I hinted at, the actual difference they would make for you would probably be minimal, especially for the cost. Sure, you could run Eero Pro, or hell, even Ruckus, but for your use-case, it would be 100-500% more cost for maybe 20-30% more benefit. Likely not worth it. Just figured I'd explain a bit as to where that 20-30% might come from.

 

[coxhaus]

The only reason for pro wireless from my stand point is to handle voice call roaming. I run Cisco small business wireless APs. I have roaming in my house. An iPad doing FaceTime will not drop a call all over my house roaming across 3 Cisco small business APs. Using a voice call there is only a spilt second delay of a few missed words when the voice call roams. So it is not worth it to me to have those few words missed. My system is 5 Ghz only by choice using Cisco WAP371 APs.

 

[zecax]

This is all working brilliantly. Better management options would be a waste in my case.

The only scenario where I see myself buying a mesh system would be if I could find a dirt cheap Orbi RBK20, or a EX7700 'seamless extender' (is that even a name?). The reason for mentioning these 2 particular models in the first place is that I've had offers of about 60€ for each for used units.

But seing as things are working so well now, there seems to be little point in taking any of them.