Budget AC router to overcome a very unusual issue

[whitestar999]

Hi,

I am facing a very unusual issue with my current wifi setup.I have TPLINK WR841N 300mbps N router connected directly to my ISP line.I have a 2 floor house & router is on the top/1st floor.The problem I am facing is that my wifi devices on lower/ground floor frequently disconnects from wifi network & when attempting to reconnect these devices get "authentication failure" error even though same devices would connect fine on top floor.After further investigation I found out that the reason behind this is "local peering" bandwidth usage in torrent software in my PC located at top floor.If I am uploading at a total rate of 2MB/s(~16mbps connection speed) on 3-4 active torrents then devices on lower floor have no issue connecting to wifi.However,if I am running a torrent connected with local peers & that single torrent is uploading at,say,1.4MB/s(~11mbps connection speed) then wifi devices on lower floor failed to connect to wifi network.

Now I am thinking that this might be because wifi router is giving priority to local peering torrent data traffic over wifi generated by my PC at top floor & which is relatively close to wifi router resulting in lower floor devices getting kicked off the wifi network.As of now I am thinking that getting a budget AC router(something like TPLINK Archer C20 750mbps AC) & connecting my PC(desktop & after buying an AC usb wifi adapter) to wifi network over 5GHz should be able to solve this issue.However I am not sure about it hence this thread because I will be buying 2 devices(a budget AC router & a budget usb AC wifi adapter) & if even after that I found out that all this can only be solved by running an ethernet cable to connect my PC to router then that would be an unnecessary waste of money for me.

 

[sfx2000]

Just reduce the number of concurrent connections in your Torrent client - the defaults can run many routers out of memory on the NAT tables...

 

[whitestar999]

I don't think no. of concurrent connections is the issue here.I don't have any issues running torrents as long as they don't use local peering or use limited local peering(below 500KB/s upload/download).

 

[PowerChaos]

I use a asus ac87 but it is not really a budget
I tried other routers before and got the same problem as you except that my phones just refuse to connect
It could be the encryption. Dit you try it with out encryption ?? If that works then mostly the router is out of memory or CPU to high load to even authenticate
If same problem exist then it is the routing table ( nat is local routing table -> local peering is still local broadcasting ) so just disable local peering or get a router with custom firmware optimized for routing xd
Greets from powerchaos


Greets from PowerChaos
Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

 

[whitestar999]

I got that but then why is it that the same device/phone is able to connect to wifi network when on same floor.If NAT or cpu or memory is the issue then shouldn't it be independent of range(no matter where the device is,if NAT/cpu/ram is fully utilized then it shouldn't be able to connect).

Also I thought local peering for torrents is handled at ISP level so why would router's resources be used for this.I mean it is not like I am downloading/uploading from some neighbour with same ISP.My best guess is that my ISP is using something like below:
http://extremepeering.net/en/

 

[PowerChaos]

How longer the distance how weaker the power and how more power you use. See with mobile phone. If your carrier is out of reach your phone battery goes down faster ( up to 30% )
So you need longer time. More CPU power and more packet resending. Add this to a buzzy CPU and it goes slow or down. Encryption need CPU power and a full key to work. So it waits on a successful package. Longer range longer time ... more packages needed. Longer decoding and so on. Same as if you shout to a persons close to you or shout at a person at a distance. Mostly you need to repeat yourself to hear in the distance and mostly he heard a part of it but not everything xd


Greets from PowerChaos
Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

 

[whitestar999]

So in other words if I can boost the signal strength then that should also take care of this issue.To me it seems like getting a router with more range is a better solution then trying to look for a router with enhanced hardware or custom firmware with optimized NAT.

 

[PowerChaos]

Basicly yes. Stronger transmission should take care of the problem
Cheapest solution is using a repeater. But it will cut the speed in half
I could suggest the netgear repeater ( block with 2 external antennas and cost about 20€ ) as I used them before and are easy to Config
Or a more expensive router like a netgear nighthawk 7000 ( I think. Is around 200€ or my personal favor a asus ac88u ( around 260€ I think )
Those also got the option for custom firmware ( tomato and Merlin )
They also got better hardware but that's where you basicly pay for xd


Greets from PowerChaos
Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

 

[whitestar999]

The thing is,I want to upgrade to AC network so don't want to spend on any N products which is what I would get for ~20€ when buying a decent repeater here.I am planning on getting Tplink Archer C60 which is available for ~45€ here.It has Qualcomm Atheros QCA9561 cpu,8mb flash 64mb ram,three 2.4GHz antennas and two 5GHz antennas.What do you think about it?Next one is Archer C1200 with a Broadcom cpu with 16mb flash & 128mb ram but it costs ~62€.

I just need enough coverage in the lower floor especially in area directly below the room where router will be placed.My ISP connection currently is 40mbps & max I can upgrade it to is 100mbps.There is no wireless streaming etc,only internet usage.

 

[PowerChaos]

well , it seems the c60 is good for network coverage (based on what i found ) , but it only got 100mbit ports for wan/lan
so you need to bridge it to get some AC performance (repeater function if exist on it )
so the c1200 would be a better choise if the lan ports mather to you ( they are gbit ports )

also the c60 got a newer processor

the Qualcomm CPU is far more powerful than the Broadcom routers which is useful for VPN performance, not to mention it runs cooler.

Greets From PowerChaos

 

[whitestar999]

What about bridging to get AC performance?As I understand,one needs to have AC wifi adapter in device to get AC network performance from an AC router.The whole point of getting this C60 router is to avoid using repeaters so why would I be needing a repeater function(which I think it doesn't have anyway).

Yes,gigabit lan ports are good but as I said earlier,the max my ISP can provide is 100mbps & there is not much data transfer between devices.

 

[PowerChaos]

Because for me personal it seems useless to get a ac router that doesn't have gbit
So ac get basicly wasted same as the full purpose of n network (150 mbit )
In bridge/repeater mode you still benefit from faster local speed ( max 50% )
Unless it is your main / only router then I am confusing differend posts with each other and is repeater function useless xd

But that's just how I think about things ( like getting a i7 and 64gb ram with wd green drive on Sata 2 connection as main drive ... just a waste if you do not get at least a ssd as main drive ...)

Greets from PowerChaos
Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

 

[whitestar999]

My ISP can give upto 100mbps max net connection.I don't use wired networking with devices & yes it will be the main/only router in the house replacing the current W841N.My main concern is good signal range & ability to download at 100mbps using ISP connection in future(currently I got 40mbps) without worrying about interference from nearby 2.4GHz networks.

 

[PowerChaos]

Then the c60 seems fine for me. It should be able to handle the clients as it signal is more optimized

The repeater answer was indeed for a other post
I guess it got messed up with Tapatalk and late hours. Sorry for that


Greets from PowerChaos
Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

 

[MichaelCG]

You will always have to worry about interfering 2.4GHz neighboring networks if you are dependent upon 2.4GHz. You will only achieve 100Mbps wireless if you are using 5GHz.

You say there is no wireless streaming, just Internet usage....what do you think torrenting looks like from a network flow? It is streaming...it is a constant back and forth chatter. It is probably worse than streaming actually from a wireless network perspective since there is lots of communication flows in both directions.

There is a good chance you are just saturating the available airspace as well if you are only using 2.4GHz and have a busy torrent box running over WiFi. Or as stated earlier...you could be over running the NAT tables in the router.

First thing I would do is run that hard cable from your PC to the router and see if you still have issues. If that fixes your issues, it isn't the NAT tables...it is more likely the available airspace. If that doesn't fix your issues, I would say that points more towards the NAT tables being full.

 

[whitestar999]

I know & that's why I am planning on upgrading to Tplink Archer C60.Also the peculiar thing about my torrent software saturating available airspace is that it is dependent on local peering.
Scenario 1:All torrents running out of which 1 torrent connected to local peers uploading at 1MB/s,total uploading at 1.2MB/s--->problem
Scenario 2:All torrents running,no torrent connected to local peers,total uploading at 1.2MB/s--->no problem

I will do the test with lan wire but I am leaning towards the available airspace issue,more specifically that router gives preference to local peering traffic over wifi reducing airspace available for other devices situated farther from the router.

 

[whitestar999]

So I did the test by connecting system to router via ethernet & then running local peering torrents & there was no issue.So it seems the problem is available airspace not NAT tables.Interestingly though total torrent uploading rate of 1.5MB/s with no local peering cause no issue but a single torrent with local peer uploading at 1MB/s with no other torrents running cause issue.Is there that much of a difference between wifi traffic of torrents using local peers & torrents without local peers?

 

[PowerChaos]

it seems so
here is a quote over local peering and how it works

Suppose if there a file that everybody wants like a video it ‘s downloaded by many
and chances are somebody on your broadband network downloaded it too
And, when you download it , your torrent client search for the closest
seeder possible who has the file that you asked for and thus you get
crazy downloading speed.

There’s a specific term for this called ” local peering ”

also wifi is more intensive then direct connection

In summary, with Wi-Fi, there’s a bit more of a delay when signals travel back and forth between a Wi-Fi device and your wireless router. With a wired Ethernet connection, there’s much less latency.

There is also a part about bufferbloat

"Bufferbloat is undesirable latency caused by routers and cable/DSL modems buffering more data than necessary. It occurs at any bottleneck in a network: the most common place is the connection between your router/modem and your ISP".

Home routers usually don't have a lot of buffers. Its unlikely bufferbloat is a problem there. And you must be aware: bufferbloat is only a problem when links are congested. Easiest solution: don't download torrent and other huge data sets while you are playing a game. I bet you already knew that.

so in short
if you are happy about the torrent speed , disable local peering and problem should be solved

Greets From PowerChaos

 

[sfx2000]

I don't think no. of concurrent connections is the issue here.I don't have any issues running torrents as long as they don't use local peering or use limited local peering(below 500KB/s upload/download).

Torrents tear the hell out of memory on the primary router/AP - local or not, so limit the numbers, and you'll be fine - It can be state tables on the WAN/LAN interface, or the connection tables internally on the local area network.

 

[whitestar999]

Torrents tear the hell out of memory on the primary router/AP - local or not, so limit the numbers, and you'll be fine - It can be state tables on the WAN/LAN interface, or the connection tables internally on the local area network.

As mentioned in my earlier post I did the test by connecting system to router via ethernet & then local peering does not cause any issues whatsoever.So this can not be due to tables because tables remain same whether using wifi or wired connection to router.

As mentioned by @PowerChaos above the reason seems to be wifi with its inherently greater latency than ethernet.I am guessing it means router is unable to keep up with new devices request to join wifi network at long distances because of the saturation of wifi network by local peering torrents.Note that said devices can still connect to wifi network if located close to wifi router(say same floor 10-15m radius) but not in areas which were already in weak range zones before starting of local peering torrents(& it can be a single or just 2-3 local peering torrents that can cause the issue,nothing much if you see even a decent download manager now-a-days has 4-5 concurrent connections).