Can we please stop calling it mesh?

[thiggins]

The laptop is designed to connect even if the channels are different so a star system effectively gives you the same wireless results.

When you say "nobody installs it that way", that is not true for large multi-AP systems. Those are designed so that there is always some overlap between APs. Otherwise you'd have dead spots.

If an AP dies, whether its backhaul is Ethernet or Wi-Fi, yes the STA may try to roam to another in-range AP. But I'm discussing the AP's network connection.

In a similar way, a mesh leaf node with Wi-Fi backhaul to another leaf node will try to connect to another leaf node if the one it is connected to dies. If the leaf node re-establishes connection back to root quickly, the STA will have no reason to move to another AP.

 

[coxhaus]

There is no difference in a home setup to the users. Very few systems are over 2 APs. And they are all keyed around a central control.

 

[heaven]

Mesh technology has nothing to do with how devices roam. Mesh determines how APs interconnect, not STAs.

This Is undefined.

Let's just remember how these things were first advertised and their key (or even killer features).

One of them was a smooth transition (roaming) thanks to a single BSSID and a special roaming mechanism, which wasn't available before (at least in mass products). We had wireless repeaters/access points, whatever but no roaming.

Another one was the ability (not a requirement) to install the system without any preinstalled wires. If I am not mistaken, Netgear did offer a wired backhaul from the very beginning.

So in my opinion, a WiFi Mesh is a collective term, where APs could be connected to their neighbors and where WiFi ranges overlap creating sustained coverage and smooth STAs transition from one access point to another. It is not about just how access points are interconnected but also how they operate as a whole.

 

[thiggins]

So in my opinion, a WiFi Mesh is a collective term, where APs could be connected to their neighbors and where WiFi ranges overlap creating sustained coverage and smooth STAs transition from one access point to another. It is not about just how access points are interconnected but also how they operate as a whole.

This is not correct. You have described a properly designed multi-AP network, which can be a Wi-Fi mesh network. But Wi-Fi mesh uses Wi-Fi for AP to AP connection (backhaul).

Wi-Fi mesh has nothing to do with how STAs roam. That is most affected by the STA's design, AP placement and, more recently, support for 802.11k,v and r in both STA and AP.

 

[coxhaus]

This is not correct. You have described a properly designed multi-AP network, which can be a Wi-Fi mesh network. But Wi-Fi mesh uses Wi-Fi for AP to AP connection (backhaul).

Layer 1, physical media does not matter when it comes to mesh. It can be wireless, wire or laser. It does not matter. It is redundancy that matters.

 

[thiggins]

Layer 1, physical media does not matter when it comes to mesh. It can be wireless, wire or laser. It does not matter. It is redundancy that matters.

Correct. But, again, I am referring to Wi-Fi mesh.

 

[Tech Junky]

Correct. But, again, I am referring to Wi-Fi mesh.

Can we please stop calling it mesh?​

 

[thiggins]

Can we please stop calling it mesh?​

What is your point?

 

[Tech Junky]

What is your point?

My point is your title is ambiguous as you can see from the discussion here there are different mediums of mesh. Physical / Design / Invisible.

You get frustrated when there's deviation from your Invisible mesh. Might as well just lock the thread and move onto something different.

 

[Easy Rhino]

So you know, what we really need, then, is a simple term for "multi AP system using ethernet backhaul" that's as succinct as "mesh".

 

[coxhaus]

Just because you use wireless does not mean it is a mesh network.

 

[sfx2000]

I see many posts that ask about Wi-Fi "mesh" systems using Ethernet backhaul. This is not a Wi-Fi "mesh" system. It is a multi-AP system with maybe some central management.

Hi @thiggins

It's a valid point - Marketing has to try to match up one approach to another, so that the average consumer can attempt to make some decisions on the equipment they purchase (or not).

There are true mesh products out there (for example, devices built on QCA's IPQ40xx platform w/QSDK), and there are "systems" such as Netgear's Orbi, which is sold as "mesh" but it's more a multiple point WiFi system using WiFi as a dedicated distribution system.

Even Asus approach with AIMesh, which is interesting as it is not locked to a single chipset type/vendor, it still has to be sold as something that again, can be compared to products from other vendors.

Nominally, Apple's 802.11n/11ac could be considered mesh by today's marketing as they were much more than just WDS or 11s

So I'll ask this...

How can we define the buckets across different technical solutions that essentially solve the same problem?

Mesh is the umbrella - the implementations can be defined within that umbrella.

 

[thiggins]

@sfx2000 I think there are four attributes a system must have to be called a Wi-Fi mesh system:

• Multiple access points (AP)
• One AP connected to Ethernet network interface (root)
• The other AP(s) connected to root or each other via Wi-Fi (Wi-Fi backhaul)
• Central management of the system

The elimination of Ethernet as a requirement to build a multi-AP system is, IMO, the key attribute. Yes, that was possible with extenders, but router + extender systems didn't have central management, were usually just router + one extender and a pain to configure (even the ones that didn't require WDS).

 

[heaven]

@sfx2000 I think there are four attributes a system must have to be called a Wi-Fi mesh system:

• Multiple access points (AP)
• One AP connected to Ethernet network interface (root)
• The other AP(s) connected to root or each other via Wi-Fi (Wi-Fi backhaul)
• Central management of the system

The elimination of Ethernet as a requirement to build a multi-AP system is, IMO, the key attribute. Yes, that was possible with extenders, but router + extender systems didn't have central management, were usually just router + one extender and a pain to configure (even the ones that didn't require WDS).

I am pretty sure you misunderstood the term. You think it's called WiFi Mesh because of how the nodes are connected while it is called WiFi in the first place for the same reason why a WiFi router is called WiFi router. Because it provides WiFi access to the network. There's just nothing about how nodes have to communicate with each other in this term.

And this makes perfect sense as this is more a marketing term targeting end-users and there's no need to include some of its internal specifics, such as the type of interconnection, into the term name because that doesn't change the purpose. The WiFi mesh is a term describing multiple WiFi devices (routers) providing WiFi access to the network, interconnected in any available way and I don't see any reason why to separate these and overcomplicate the terminology.

 

[Smokey613]

The tri-band eero units do a pretty decent job of a ”wifi mesh” as all bands are used to provide connectivity. My 3 old eero pro units keep active links with each other across all bands. They may not provide the fastest throughput but do maintain connectivity real well and client roaming works real good. I realized for my home usage, two units were all I needed so I guess I did not have a real mesh once I took the third one offline. I have since gone back to my pair of CT8. All I really need is a wifi link between my main isp connections in the living room and the equipment on my office located in a converted outside storage room. The CT8 setup uses a dedicated wifi backhaul on the 5-2 band which provides plenty of bandwidth.

 

[Tech9]

You're such a pain in the... mesh, @Smokey613. Weekly signature update and equipment change guy.

 

[Smokey613]

You're such a pain in the... mesh, @Smokey613. Weekly signature update and equipment change guy.

That’s me!!! In fact, I had to go back to my eero pro units. The Asus wifi is just not as reliable. Ok…. I mean it…. I am staying with what I have until I get gig internet.