Mesh vs redundant WAP routers

[stevech]

there's no automatic optimal roaming in consumer WiFi. A handheld, moving between rooms/floors, will usually continue to use the originally selected access device even though there is now a much better choice (nearer, stronger signals to/from client = faster).

The usual solution:
Give each access device a unique SSID, such as
MyFamRm
MyOffice
MyPatio

use the same encryption key for all (for simplicity).

Now, the users must know to manually choose from the list since WiFi won't automatically switch to a better/closer access device.

If you use the same SSID for all, the user can't tell which is which, with typical client software.

Enterprise costly WiFi does real roaming, with best-AP selection, and fast re-authentication.

A mesh network is a very bad idea. There's the 1/n througput penality and there's the lack of a standard for vendor interoperability. There's also the same non-optimal automatic access device selection as in the multiple-AP case.

Be sure to have ONE router. Routers re-purposed as APs are fine so long as each has DHCP disabled and the WAN ethernet port is not used.

 

[thiggins]

Channels 1 and 4 are overlapping. Use 1, 6, 11.

I suggest you assign a unique SSID per AP and have people manually switch.

No single AP is going to reach all 3 floors and handle that many clients.

 

[Dreamslacker]

Would it be better to go with one higher powered AP like this: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0055PKSG6/?tag=snbforums-20

I have a large three story house (finished basement) with a lot of wireless clients (iPads, iphones, etc.). I thought multiple APs was the was to go, but maybe just one 1k mW AP like the PicoStation is better?

Use the Asus (RT-N66U) or AirportExtreme as router?

Family harmony is at risk.

It's better to go with an AP per level or possibly more if you have many walls to penetrate.

As I tell my clients - just because your device can see the AP doesn't mean the AP can see your device.
A simple analogy - Network communications is 2-way. Like a conversation at a distance, your high powered AP can shout and be heard but if your device whispers then that is only 1-way communication and isn't exactly effective.

If you are willing to go Ubnt, it might be worth it to up the ante and head for the Unifi series. Zero handoff will handle the client roaming and isn't restricted to the roaming-aggressiveness on the client side.

 

[coxhaus]

Save your wireless bandwidth for real roaming devices. Use wired connections for stationary devices. It makes a difference and it all adds up.

PS
I believe in this to the extent that I have a wire setting by my easy chair to connect my laptop with. My laptop never moves but if it does I just unplug and my laptop switches to wireless automagically.

 

[stevech]

Wireless credo... Without Mobility, there's no need for wireless.

(excluding point to point links)

 

[Java]

It's better to go with an AP per level or possibly more if you have many walls to penetrate.

As I tell my clients - just because your device can see the AP doesn't mean the AP can see your device.
A simple analogy - Network communications is 2-way. Like a conversation at a distance, your high powered AP can shout and be heard but if your device whispers then that is only 1-way communication and isn't exactly effective.

If you are willing to go Ubnt, it might be worth it to up the ante and head for the Unifi series. Zero handoff will handle the client roaming and isn't restricted to the roaming-aggressiveness on the client side.

Yep. Makes total sense.

I'm definitely interested in Ubnt. I'm thinking 3 UniFi AP's should work. What about the router? Cool to use my Asus or AirportExtreme or should I get something commercial? Ubnt's edge router?

Thanks, much

 

[PrivateJoker]

Oops this thread I was very interested in slipped under my radar for awhile! Anyway, @Java, I'm very curious as to the what SF we're talking about, and what kind of outside area you are looking to give wifi access to. I know you mentioned a mix of Asus w/ a few Apple devices hard wired to it to serve as APs, and that in general it is not working for you right now. I also saw you mention that using the same SSID has generally given you poor wifi speeds/connections to your devices.

And saw Tim's comment along those same lines. .

The main problem consumers have using wireless networks with more than one AP and a single SSID is that clients tend to stay associated to the first AP they see, even when signal level is very low.

Let me preface this by saying even though you and I both have Asus & Apple mixed APs (and I've actually had as many as 4 total Apple APs [in part for AirPlay functionality] running simultaneously in AP mode) and I have a house that's mostly hardwired and stuff, there is still so much individual variability between the layouts of our houses, what client devices we have, etc, etc, that what may work for me may totally not work for you.

And I can't say that Tim, who I completely defer to and respect with his breadth of knowledge and usage/testing of devices, is necessarily incorrect saying that multiple APs with a single SSID may be problematic for many/most consumers that attempt to that setup.

However, for me, in my environment, I was only able to really get things working to my satisfaction (albeit the % of my total network data over wifi is small, using it to control other devices, and do occasional web surfing is an important function) after really carefully sorting out:

- my AP placement (divergent corners of the house don't directly translate into the best places to put the APs, I positioned them with a bias for where I would most likely be using them, so I actually have two that are separated by only 30' or so, but those walls between them are very attenuating)

- band selection: carefully going through the typical usage for every device (would I need it out in the garage/workshop ever? If so, then it's on the 2.4ghz network only, etc.) so I could put each device on only one band that worked better for what it would be doing and where it would be.

- For areas that I was unable to hardwire, but needed LAN for devices that were static (physically speaking) I made sure every device had an actual ethernet port in it and not just built in wifi. I then got a couple cheap linksys e3000 routers and put DD-WRT on them and made 5ghz bridges out of them, just because the wifi that a multi stream bridge can get from a multi stream AP is so much a better signal than the wifi built into my smart TV, AppleTV, TiVo, etc.

- 5ghz APs got different SSIDs because one was placed in an area with extreme 5ghz attenuation, and I wanted to be very explicit with which devices I would allow to connect to it

- 2.4ghz APs have same SSID because they overlap their sweet spot a fair amount in the middle of the house and found that my mobile devices especially had a heck of a time switching over to a different SSID if it still had any signal at all (even barely usable) from the first AP, but with same SSID on different channels I can walk from being inside my garage (completely supplied by my Airport Express AP), through my house, out the front of the house, and to the front street (though the sweet spot of my N66, then to the limits of its ability) and stream Netflix or HBOgo and it will switch APs while streaming and not skip a beat.

- I put all my mobile devices on 2.4ghz, and all my laptops on 5ghz. The laptops seem to be able to juggle different SSIDs in same band without any problem. On my one laptop I bring to the garage occasionally it also is allowed on the 2.4ghz networks, but its NIC settings have that set down 3rd in the priorities behind the 5ghz SSIDs. It will switch back to the 5ghz SSIDs as soon as it sees one with a very strong signal. (It would be difficult to keep the laptop open and active and have it switch to another SSID or band, but I don't walk around with my laptop open anyway. . .closing it, then opening it somewhere else will always get the fastest available connection)


Just wanted to throw out some of the stuff that has taken me quite a long time to fully square away, hopefully some of this helps with whatever road you end up taking.

If you want to sell any of your Asus or Apple stuff, shoot me a PM. . .I'm moving. Time to start the fun again.

 

[Java]

Oops this thread I was very interested in slipped under my radar for awhile! Anyway, @Java, I'm very curious as to the what SF we're talking about, and what kind of outside area you are looking to give wifi access to. I know you mentioned a mix of Asus w/ a few Apple devices hard wired to it to serve as APs, and that in general it is not working for you right now. I also saw you mention that using the same SSID has generally given you poor wifi speeds/connections to your devices.

And saw Tim's comment along those same lines. .



Let me preface this by saying even though you and I both have Asus & Apple mixed APs (and I've actually had as many as 4 total Apple APs [in part for AirPlay functionality] running simultaneously in AP mode) and I have a house that's mostly hardwired and stuff, there is still so much individual variability between the layouts of our houses, what client devices we have, etc, etc, that what may work for me may totally not work for you.

And I can't say that Tim, who I completely defer to and respect with his breadth of knowledge and usage/testing of devices, is necessarily incorrect saying that multiple APs with a single SSID may be problematic for many/most consumers that attempt to that setup.

However, for me, in my environment, I was only able to really get things working to my satisfaction (albeit the % of my total network data over wifi is small, using it to control other devices, and do occasional web surfing is an important function) after really carefully sorting out:

- my AP placement (divergent corners of the house don't directly translate into the best places to put the APs, I positioned them with a bias for where I would most likely be using them, so I actually have two that are separated by only 30' or so, but those walls between them are very attenuating)

- band selection: carefully going through the typical usage for every device (would I need it out in the garage/workshop ever? If so, then it's on the 2.4ghz network only, etc.) so I could put each device on only one band that worked better for what it would be doing and where it would be.

- For areas that I was unable to hardwire, but needed LAN for devices that were static (physically speaking) I made sure every device had an actual ethernet port in it and not just built in wifi. I then got a couple cheap linksys e3000 routers and put DD-WRT on them and made 5ghz bridges out of them, just because the wifi that a multi stream bridge can get from a multi stream AP is so much a better signal than the wifi built into my smart TV, AppleTV, TiVo, etc.

- 5ghz APs got different SSIDs because one was placed in an area with extreme 5ghz attenuation, and I wanted to be very explicit with which devices I would allow to connect to it

- 2.4ghz APs have same SSID because they overlap their sweet spot a fair amount in the middle of the house and found that my mobile devices especially had a heck of a time switching over to a different SSID if it still had any signal at all (even barely usable) from the first AP, but with same SSID on different channels I can walk from being inside my garage (completely supplied by my Airport Express AP), through my house, out the front of the house, and to the front street (though the sweet spot of my N66, then to the limits of its ability) and stream Netflix or HBOgo and it will switch APs while streaming and not skip a beat.

- I put all my mobile devices on 2.4ghz, and all my laptops on 5ghz. The laptops seem to be able to juggle different SSIDs in same band without any problem. On my one laptop I bring to the garage occasionally it also is allowed on the 2.4ghz networks, but its NIC settings have that set down 3rd in the priorities behind the 5ghz SSIDs. It will switch back to the 5ghz SSIDs as soon as it sees one with a very strong signal. (It would be difficult to keep the laptop open and active and have it switch to another SSID or band, but I don't walk around with my laptop open anyway. . .closing it, then opening it somewhere else will always get the fastest available connection)


Just wanted to throw out some of the stuff that has taken me quite a long time to fully square away, hopefully some of this helps with whatever road you end up taking.

If you want to sell any of your Asus or Apple stuff, shoot me a PM. . .I'm moving. Time to start the fun again.

Hey Joker,

Thanks again for your in-depth reply.

One of the areas of concern we've been skirting around is the novice user. My wife and kids are the biggest users of the wireless network. Between ipads, vitas, etc., they are heavy users, but don't really understand the wireless network. As all suggested, the rest of my network is wired.

The core of the problem is that I have three AP's running in my house and the client device can stay connected to a weak signaled AP. My wife/kid's won't understand that and know how to fix, so I'm going the commercial route to make it bullet proof.

I went ahead and ordered three UniFi AP's. I'll go ahead and use the Asus as the router (turn off AP) and see how it works.

I'll report back.

Thanks, much!!

 

[Java]

UniFi Update

As quick update, I got my 3 APs a day early. Hook them up in no time. What a breeze.

So far, so good...

Quick question for the UniFi users, do I do anything to enable Zero-Handoff Roaming? I set all three AP's to the same channel with same SSID. That it?

Thanks

 

[Dreamslacker]

As quick update, I got my 3 APs a day early. Hook them up in no time. What a breeze.

So far, so good...

Quick question for the UniFi users, do I do anything to enable Zero-Handoff Roaming? I set all three AP's to the same channel with same SSID. That it?

Thanks

Using the Unifi controller software, group all your APs into a single WLAN group to enable Zero-handoff. You do not need the Unifi controller to be online for it to work after that. You just need it to setup the APs.

 

[Java]

Using the Unifi controller software, group all your APs into a single WLAN group to enable Zero-handoff. You do not need the Unifi controller to be online for it to work after that. You just need it to setup the APs.

Thanks much, Dreamslacker

As a noob, it took me a while to figure out that WLAN is only available in UniFi 3.0, which is only avail in beta. Once I figured that out, it worked fine.

Thanks, again.

 

[sfx2000]

I am in the same boat as the OP. I am contemplating the Open Mesh system for my home.

I have failed to create a redundant AP network (Asus RT-N66U as the main, Airport Extreme and Express as APs). I've used the same SSIDs, set the airports as AP's only, etc, but still have problems. Mainly have connection issues and low speed issues outside of the main area.

I have ethernet throughout my house, so I thought the Open Mesh approach seems easy and complete. I was planning on using my Airport Extreme as the router (can't figure out how to disable the wireless on the Asus) and then start adding Open Mesh units around the house. Where I don't have an ethernet connection I can still extend with reduced throughput.

I have a pretty big house with all three floors being used and a big family (i.e., all over the house), so I need something that covers all (including outside deck) and is bullet proof (don't have time to keep playing admin).

Thoughts? Thanks!!

Mesh is a solution for some, but I'd recommend keeping what you have...

With the airports - put them in Bridge Mode, having the common SSID with your Asus unit, and backhaul them via Ethernet to the home router.

Good place to start is here...

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4260

sfx

 

[sfx2000]

there's no automatic optimal roaming in consumer WiFi. A handheld, moving between rooms/floors, will usually continue to use the originally selected access device even though there is now a much better choice (nearer, stronger signals to/from client = faster).

The usual solution:
Give each access device a unique SSID, such as
MyFamRm
MyOffice
MyPatio

use the same encryption key for all (for simplicity).

Now, the users must know to manually choose from the list since WiFi won't automatically switch to a better/closer access device.

If you use the same SSID for all, the user can't tell which is which, with typical client software.

Enterprise costly WiFi does real roaming, with best-AP selection, and fast re-authentication.

A mesh network is a very bad idea. There's the 1/n througput penality and there's the lack of a standard for vendor interoperability. There's also the same non-optimal automatic access device selection as in the multiple-AP case.

Be sure to have ONE router. Routers re-purposed as APs are fine so long as each has DHCP disabled and the WAN ethernet port is not used.

I respectfully disagree...

Common SSID - 1/6/11 channel planning for 2.4GHz in narrow channel mode

For 5Ghz - consider same SSID as the 2.4Ghz, might use a different one, again, having unique channels for the 5Ghz, there you might consider wide channels perhaps.

Most modern clients, e.g. Android 4.x, iOS 6.x (or newer), Win7, Mac OSX 10.6 or later - they periodically scan and will find the strongest AP.

I've got an Ubuntu 12.04LTS box that resolutely doesn't roam, but other than that, the clients sort themselves out between AP's and bandclasses.

I've got a end-to-end Apple Airport layout, and it's pretty seamless on the handovers from one AP/band to another, to the point that I can maintain VOIP calls while walking around the house on either my iPhone 5 or my GS4 (both are dual-band) - whether using Skype, Lync, or my current SIP-based product I'm in the middle of development on (OTT/WifiOffload)

Thing to consider is that when doing a complex end-to-end multiple AP solution, keep all gear on the same vendor, and preferably on the same model/firmware level.

sfx

 

[PrivateJoker]

Common SSID - 1/6/11 channel planning for 2.4GHz in narrow channel mode

For 5Ghz - consider same SSID as the 2.4Ghz, might use a different one, again, having unique channels for the 5Ghz, there you might consider wide channels perhaps.

YMMV, but I have Asus RT-N66U as main router & AP, with a unique SSID for each freq band, and an Apple Airport Express (current gen) bridged as an auxiliary pure AP only using same 2.4ghz SSID as Asus (I don't need my 5ghz where the Apple is, the Asus suffices). In my particular environment I got much quicker/easier/cleaner AP to AP hand offs using same SSID and different channel.

I think it depends on the client device/s, use cases, etc to determine if separate or unified SSIDs are good for you. It's tricky b/c in most cases you still want the least amount of APs as needed so you don't have a noisier RF environment nor a surplus of similarly mediocre RSSI choices for a client to pick between.

In my setup almost all multi-stream client devices I have connect to 5ghz, and single stream only clients tends to leave me with just a few devices that are generally 2.4ghz only. My ios devices are dual band single stream but the antennas and radios are so tiny I put them all on 2.4ghz, the benefit of 5ghz on a single stream in my particular environment isn't a strong one.

Most modern clients, e.g. Android 4.x, iOS 6.x (or newer), Win7, Mac OSX 10.6 or later - they periodically scan and will find the strongest AP.

That's not entirely accurate. OSX will go in the preferred order of wifi networks (by SSID) you have put them in for a given network location (under network prefs). It can have a tenuous connection to a "preferred" network and be extremely uncooperative in automatically switching to another SSID even if the RSSI is better. The same isn't true with same SSID on different channels. IIRC if OSX goes to sleep and is awoken it will do a less biased scan & new wifi attachment than if you have maintained a live, but deteriorating connection.

I'm not sure about ios 7, but in 6 and earlier SSIDs were actually chosen alphabetically with little regard to RSSI (assuming you were authenticated to numerous visible networks). One can download the desktop iOS profile utility for free from Apple and setup some slightly more nuanced wifi SSID association policies. I also noticed that in ios 7 settings under privacy > location services > system services that "wi-fi" is an option you can choose to allow location services to use or not. IIRC this isn't the skyhook/Google Streetview style AP MAC lat/long tagging (I think you opt into that by using ios at all, I could be wrong) it's the reverse...using your physical location to look for familiar APs (which is ironic because in many situations, especially indoors, it will determine your location via the wifi AP MACs it sees).

 

[stevech]

Originally Posted by sfx2000 View Post
Most modern clients, e.g. Android 4.x, iOS 6.x (or newer), Win7, Mac OSX 10.6 or later - they periodically scan and will find the strongest AP.

(in consumer-land) I find that rarely do the re-scan for better. And one cannot rely on a client choosing strongest AP among several with the same SSID, at initial selection.