Various questions about wireless networking equipment

[soontobetold]

1) Wireless Access Point
My purpose is to extend my wireless coverage by connecting my Wireless Access Point to my router via an ethernet cable. Is an AP what I am looking for? If that's the case what's the "best" overall AP out there? Preferably one with 802.11ac. Also is an AP also known as something else like Range Extender or Bridge or Wireless adapter? Some websites I visit doesn't have a category for wireless AP.

Also I would assume if I require a PoE AP, my options will be quite limited? If that's not the case, are there any top of the line PoE AP that is comparable to those non PoE version?

2) Wireless Router?
I sorta got an idea of which router I would want to get (waiting for RT-AC87U). BUT I was thinking whether if is necessary in the sense that, the area that I will have all my network equipment located is where I don't really need wireless coverage.

Pardon me for my ignorance, I understand all these 802.11ac router, they offer superior wireless speed and coverage. My question is, if lets say I am only planning to turn off the wifi function and use it as a wired router and expand the ethernet ports by connecting to a switch, and then at the other end of a wire connect to an AP to provide wifi coverage in a room, will the performance differ if I were to get a top of the line 802.11ac router or just use the stock 802.11ac that my ISP will give me if I am only using it as a “wired” router? Does the 802.11ac standard affect the wired speed also or will it provide the full theoretical 1000mbps speed?

 

[microchip]

Wired speed is not affected by the wireless one. Also to make use of the AC standard you obviously would need an AC capable client

an AP can be a few things. There are WiFi-only APs which you connect to one of the LAN Port on the router or you can configure an existing router as AP which will not only provide WiFi but also wired

Difference between range extender (also called repeater) is that it connects wirelessly to your router to extend the signal while an AP uses a cable. But, IIRC, a repeater will use up to half of the provided bandwidth so it's a bad idea.

 

[fistv]

802.11ac access points are kind of slim pickings right now, it's pretty much the home router market that has gone whole hog on the ac proposed standard. From a purists point of view whether it be a DSL, Cable modem, or full GB fiber I prefer a wired only router and all wireless functions to be delivered by dedicated and physically separate access points. AP's or access points come in two flavors for this context, one is powered by a separate power adapter and connected over a normal ethernet cable, two wires. The other is capable of being powered by a POE or power over ethernet where not only the ethernet network connection is delivered over the network cable but power to operate the AP as well, simplifies wiring, you just need a router or switch that has those PoE features built in. That is how I do it here with cisco 891W's that each can power 4 cisco aeronets, not for normal home users and in most cases not for home enthusiasts either unless they know Cisco and are willing to invest the hours to configure it. Cisco support and the cisco forums make that fairly easy. The 891w is my exception, the wireless is literally a speparate entity with in the routers box and has to be configured all by itself.
Better solution for home user, good residential router, Linksys, Netgear, Asus, etc and add in a PoE switch. Most of the 8 port PoE switches have 4 of their ports for PoE, the other 4 are just normal ports. In my experience having a dedicated switch separate from the home router takes some load off the router instead of having all 4 lan ports on the router plugged into your devices, you just come out of lan4 on the router and into a port on the switch. Next step is to pick a PoE capable access point, Cisco makes them, Ubiquity, tp-link, dlink, trendnet all make them for varying prices. My only first hand knowledge is with the Cisco 1600E SAP access point, but they are a bit pricey.
At home I just put in a linksys 1900ac 3 weeks ago, I don't have any AC devices as of right now so it's not that important to me but in the future if someone shows up at the house with the newest and greatest hand held toy or our new washer and dryer only talks AC I'll be ready. Hope this makes some kind of sense and helps.

 

[soontobetold]

Wired speed is not affected by the wireless one. Also to make use of the AC standard you obviously would need an AC capable client

an AP can be a few things. There are WiFi-only APs which you connect to one of the LAN Port on the router or you can configure an existing router as AP which will not only provide WiFi but also wired

Difference between range extender (also called repeater) is that it connects wirelessly to your router to extend the signal while an AP uses a cable. But, IIRC, a repeater will use up to half of the provided bandwidth so it's a bad idea.

So basically any gigabit router would do just fine if I am only going to use it as a wired router since, say a 802.11n gigabit router would provide the same theoretical speed of 1000mpbs as compared to a 802.11ac gigabit router if i am using wired connection?

ah, i guess i am only looking at AP where i am going to use a wire to connect my router to the ap to expand the wireless coverage to another room.

any recommendations for AP like what i mentioned in my initial post?

 

[soontobetold]

802.11ac access points are kind of slim pickings right now, it's pretty much the home router market that has gone whole hog on the ac proposed standard. From a purists point of view whether it be a DSL, Cable modem, or full GB fiber I prefer a wired only router and all wireless functions to be delivered by dedicated and physically separate access points. AP's or access points come in two flavors for this context, one is powered by a separate power adapter and connected over a normal ethernet cable, two wires. The other is capable of being powered by a POE or power over ethernet where not only the ethernet network connection is delivered over the network cable but power to operate the AP as well, simplifies wiring, you just need a router or switch that has those PoE features built in. That is how I do it here with cisco 891W's that each can power 4 cisco aeronets, not for normal home users and in most cases not for home enthusiasts either unless they know Cisco and are willing to invest the hours to configure it. Cisco support and the cisco forums make that fairly easy. The 891w is my exception, the wireless is literally a speparate entity with in the routers box and has to be configured all by itself.
Better solution for home user, good residential router, Linksys, Netgear, Asus, etc and add in a PoE switch. Most of the 8 port PoE switches have 4 of their ports for PoE, the other 4 are just normal ports. In my experience having a dedicated switch separate from the home router takes some load off the router instead of having all 4 lan ports on the router plugged into your devices, you just come out of lan4 on the router and into a port on the switch. Next step is to pick a PoE capable access point, Cisco makes them, Ubiquity, tp-link, dlink, trendnet all make them for varying prices. My only first hand knowledge is with the Cisco 1600E SAP access point, but they are a bit pricey.
At home I just put in a linksys 1900ac 3 weeks ago, I don't have any AC devices as of right now so it's not that important to me but in the future if someone shows up at the house with the newest and greatest hand held toy or our new washer and dryer only talks AC I'll be ready. Hope this makes some kind of sense and helps.

hey thanks for the enlightenment. some great information there.

I get the part about the "2 flavours". I am keeping my options open. if i can get a decent AP with POE, i think it would be great as it would be easier for me to locate them, but if the options are limited and not that decent, i am fine with going for AP with independent power supply.

May I know why is it necessary to "take some load off the router" what difference does it make?

so you are actually using a linksys 1900ac (which is essentially a router) as an AP?

 

[microchip]

So basically any gigabit router would do just fine if I am only going to use it as a wired router since, say a 802.11n gigabit router would provide the same theoretical speed of 1000mpbs as compared to a 802.11ac gigabit router if i am using wired connection?

ah, i guess i am only looking at AP where i am going to use a wire to connect my router to the ap to expand the wireless coverage to another room.

any recommendations for AP like what i mentioned in my initial post?

When it comes to routers, you need to be a bit careful. First, most modern routers are Gigabit, which means that their WAN and LAN ports are all Gigabit.

Then you have the WiFi part of such routers, which is something apart. Just because it says somewhere on the package that the router is Gigabit, it does not mean that the wireless part is Gigabit too.

You can perfectly have routers which are wired Gigabit while their wireless are 300 Mbps or 450 Mbps or ...

So when we talk about a Gigabit routers, it depends on which component we refer. Wired or wireless. A Gigabit router can be only Gigabit on the wired but not on the wireless. And another router can be Gigabit on both wired and wireless. Wireless Gigabit is only available in AC routers.

So yes, on the wired side it's all Gigabit. On the wireless side, you need to look out for an AC model if you want Gigabit WiFi too.

I hope this is simple enough for you to understand

 

[soontobetold]

When it comes to routers, you need to be a bit careful. First, most modern routers are Gigabit, which means that their WAN and LAN ports are all Gigabit.

Then you have the WiFi part of such routers, which is something apart. Just because it says somewhere on the package that the router is Gigabit, it does not mean that the wireless part is Gigabit too.

You can perfectly have routers which are wired Gigabit while their wireless are 300 Mbps or 450 Mbps or ...

So when we talk about a Gigabit routers, it depends on which component we refer. Wired or wireless. A Gigabit router can be only Gigabit on the wired but not on the wireless. And another router can be Gigabit on both wired and wireless. Wireless Gigabit is only available in AC routers.

So yes, on the wired side it's all Gigabit. On the wireless side, you need to look out for an AC model if you want Gigabit WiFi too.

I hope this is simple enough for you to understand

ahhh...

So if I only want to use the wired function of a router, i can heck care all those top of the line wireless router or what not. So for wired part only, a DLINK DIR-865L will be no different to an ASUS RT-AC68U. But for the wireless feature, the AC86U would be better?

 

[fistv]

hey thanks for the enlightenment. some great information there.

I get the part about the "2 flavours". I am keeping my options open. if i can get a decent AP with POE, i think it would be great as it would be easier for me to locate them, but if the options are limited and not that decent, i am fine with going for AP with independent power supply.

May I know why is it necessary to "take some load off the router" what difference does it make?

so you are actually using a linksys 1900ac (which is essentially a router) as an AP?

I have most of my house hard wired, the only wireless we use is an iphone, moto droid cell, nexus7 and a laptop, my other stuff, replaytv, marantz av receiver, blueray, htpc, two normal PC's and two printers are all on ethernet wired as is a Playstation and a tv in the basement as well as anything that ends up on my workbench for repair, usually senior citizens whose xp machines I upgrade to linux so they don't have to spend money on upgrading.
As far as taking the load off the router, this may be a seat of the pants thing but they seem to run better when they are not passing traffic across all four ethernet ports. My 1900AC exhibited this when I first powered and configured it 3 weeks ago, then I plugged in the two netgear gb 4 port switches, one in the entertainment center upstairs and the other that has the wifes house pc and hp printer. The speed seemed to slow down quite a bit, might be my imagination, we'll see on friday when that switch gets here.
I also saw this same behavior on a linksys wrt54G that I upgraded to dd-wrt a couple of years ago, pulled the 4 Ethernet out and just connected port 4 to a 8 port linksys/cisco switch and that made the two separate sonos systems, smart TV run much better. Makes me wonder if there is some kind of switching contention issue with these home routers.

 

[microchip]

ahhh...

So if I only want to use the wired function of a router, i can heck care all those top of the line wireless router or what not. So for wired part only, a DLINK DIR-865L will be no different to an ASUS RT-AC68U. But for the wireless feature, the AC86U would be better?

If you don't care for wireless at all but want Gigabit LAN/WAN ports, any modern router will do as long as it's advertised that it's Gigabit on the wired side. There are cheap routers at about 40/50 bucks that offer only 300 Mbps wireless but have 4 ports Gigabit each. Find one and be happy.

Can't really recommend one as I have my preferences for brands so I'm biased (TP-Link, ASUS and sometimes Linksys)

On the wired side, you'll pretty much get equal performance from a top-level model and a mid or low-end model, maybe a bit more from the top-level

EDIT: yes, the AC68U will have much better WiFi performance than a low-end or mid-end model. That is on the AC side mostly

 

[azazel1024]

ahhh...

So if I only want to use the wired function of a router, i can heck care all those top of the line wireless router or what not. So for wired part only, a DLINK DIR-865L will be no different to an ASUS RT-AC68U. But for the wireless feature, the AC86U would be better?

No, because you have WAN to LAN and LAN to WAN differences between them that impact the wired only bit. First you have differences between some router on, are QoS features offered for traffic shaping (most are no, or yes but are primitive/don't work well). Next, the hardware/firmware also can have vastly different capability when talking about how much data it can pass to the internet and back. Routing has massively more overhead than switching. A gigabit switch is a gigabit switch is a gigabit switch, or darned close to that so long as you are ONLY talking about switching packets, and not in to L2/L3 features, just pure switching performance.

A router is a whole different beast. If you are simply looking at something to handle a basic internet connection, just about any gigabit router is likely to handle at least 100Mbps internet connection just fine. Start getting up in to faster connections and the differences can become readily apparent.

Also other possible features, such as storage performance if hanging a USB drive off the router varies wildly, extras like having a built in print server, VPN server, etc. Typically a higher end router is going to be better at those things (or just have them).

 

[AdvHomeServer]

soontobetold,

I read your post several times and I'm still not sure what you are asking for. It sounds like you have a wired system that satisfies most of your needs, but need wireless sometimes. The wireless clients are close to your router. AC class routers appear to be of interest to you, but you haven't stated any AC class clients are in use.

If you have only occasional need for wireless, then a gigabit wireless router with possibly an unmanaged gigabit switch will support your wired needs. PoE is needed only for PoE devices attached to your PoE switch, such as cameras. All wireless routers allows you to turn on and off the radios as needed. If you are using 5GHz clients then you should consider a dual band router. If you are using AC class clients, then you should consider an AC class dual band router with a good track record. If you have no AC clients, then just get a good dual band router at your price point. Amazon ratings are useful. If you're not currently using any 5GHz client, you may someday. If not, just turn the radio off.

In the case you need inexpensive professional class electronics, Ubiquity offers items that may suit your interests. My response above relates to consumer grade stuff.

 

[microchip]

soontobetold,

I read your post several times and I'm still not sure what you are asking for. It sounds like you have a wired system that satisfies most of your needs, but need wireless sometimes. The wireless clients are close to your router. AC class routers appear to be of interest to you, but you haven't stated any AC class clients are in use.

If you have only occasional need for wireless, then a gigabit router with possibly an unmanaged gigabit switch will support your wired needs. PoE is needed only for PoE devices attacked to your switch, such as cameras. All wireless routers allows you to turn on and off the radios as needed. If you are using 5GHz clients then you should consider a dual band router. If you are using AC class clients, then you should consider an AC class dual band router with a good track record. If you have no AC clients, then just get a good dual band router at your price point. Amazon ratings are useful.

In the case you need inexpensive professional class electronics, Ubiquity offers items that may suit your interests. My response above relates to consumer grade stuff.

From what I understood, the wired is much more important than the wireless for him. He also wants to add more ports for his wired so I suggested a unmanaged switch. He also seems to want to put an AP somewhere for the occasional wireless needs

 

[soontobetold]

This is my intention:

Plan:
Fibre optics termination point and Cat 6(a) termination points all in a Utility Box located somewhere in the house.

Cat 6(a) cables will be pulled to various locations and terminated with RJ45 keystone.

At the “user” end of the cat 6(a) cables in various locations, I am intending to add Wireless AP. all points will have at least 2 wires, (for redundancy sake), since I will have 2 rj45 keystones, 1 will be used for wireless AP, the other will either be kept free or use for wired connections

In the Utility box…

Fibre Optics point ——(Fibre cable)——> modem —— (ethernet cable) ——> router —— (ethernet cable) ——> network switch (to expand the lan ports available to me) —— (ethernet cable) ——> cat 6(a) termination points.

If you don't care for wireless at all but want Gigabit LAN/WAN ports, any modern router will do as long as it's advertised that it's Gigabit on the wired side. There are cheap routers at about 40/50 bucks that offer only 300 Mbps wireless but have 4 ports Gigabit each. Find one and be happy.

Can't really recommend one as I have my preferences for brands so I'm biased (TP-Link, ASUS and sometimes Linksys)

On the wired side, you'll pretty much get equal performance from a top-level model and a mid or low-end model, maybe a bit more from the top-level

EDIT: yes, the AC68U will have much better WiFi performance than a low-end or mid-end model. That is on the AC side mostly

Initially I wanted to just do alway with the router the ISP will be giving and just get an Asus RT-AC86U as router issued by ISP are generally of lower performance.

However as my fibre optics point and termination point of my Cat 6(a) wires are located in a metal utility box and in a not so ideal place, I feel that the wireless performance and range of the RT-AC86U will take quite a big hit for the price I am going to pay due to reflection and the relative" remote location of the utility box.

Now that you say the on the wired side, I'll pretty much get equal performance for the different range of router (I'll assume the DIR-865L should be quite top end and the wired component shouldn't lose to the RT-AC86U by that much?). It will make better sense for me not to waste money on a top of the line RT-AC86U router, when the range the performance will be affected, and just use the DIR-865L issued by my ISP, and connect an AP using an ethernet cable to it and place the AP in a more ideal location?

No, because you have WAN to LAN and LAN to WAN differences between them that impact the wired only bit. First you have differences between some router on, are QoS features offered for traffic shaping (most are no, or yes but are primitive/don't work well). Next, the hardware/firmware also can have vastly different capability when talking about how much data it can pass to the internet and back. Routing has massively more overhead than switching. A gigabit switch is a gigabit switch is a gigabit switch, or darned close to that so long as you are ONLY talking about switching packets, and not in to L2/L3 features, just pure switching performance.

A router is a whole different beast. If you are simply looking at something to handle a basic internet connection, just about any gigabit router is likely to handle at least 100Mbps internet connection just fine. Start getting up in to faster connections and the differences can become readily apparent.

Also other possible features, such as storage performance if hanging a USB drive off the router varies wildly, extras like having a built in print server, VPN server, etc. Typically a higher end router is going to be better at those things (or just have them).

this is getting a little too technical for me to understand, but does what i say above make any sense to you and whether it's a good idea?

The internet plan i am going to get will have a speed of 500mpbs. there are already plans out there that tops 1Gbps, but cost is still on the high side now hence i am not getting that yet. but i want to keep my options open so the equipment i am getting must be future proof hence it should at least handle gigabit internet on the wired side.

soontobetold,

I read your post several times and I'm still not sure what you are asking for. It sounds like you have a wired system that satisfies most of your needs, but need wireless sometimes. The wireless clients are close to your router. AC class routers appear to be of interest to you, but you haven't stated any AC class clients are in use.

If you have only occasional need for wireless, then a gigabit wireless router with possibly an unmanaged gigabit switch will support your wired needs. PoE is needed only for PoE devices attached to your PoE switch, such as cameras. All wireless routers allows you to turn on and off the radios as needed. If you are using 5GHz clients then you should consider a dual band router. If you are using AC class clients, then you should consider an AC class dual band router with a good track record. If you have no AC clients, then just get a good dual band router at your price point. Amazon ratings are useful. If you're not currently using any 5GHz client, you may someday. If not, just turn the radio off.

In the case you need inexpensive professional class electronics, Ubiquity offers items that may suit your interests. My response above relates to consumer grade stuff.

I have written a summarised version of what I am intending above. Don’t have AC class clients YET, but intend of future proofing.

As described above about my intention. I will definitely have AP and will have a few cameras for “surveillance” purposes. Whether I get PoE version of them or not depends on whether I can get decent PoE AP, Cameras and switch. If I can’t then I will just add power points to those places I am placing the equipment, if I can get decent PoE version of them, then it will save me the need to install power points. Just want to keep my options open.

I am already using 5ghz clients, but I am looking at getting AC class dual band router for future proofing.

Pardon my ignorance, what’s ubiquity?

From what I understood, the wired is much more important than the wireless for him. He also wants to add more ports for his wired so I suggested a unmanaged switch. He also seems to want to put an AP somewhere for the occasional wireless needs

actually both are equally important to me. just that I want to have good wired infrastructure to support my wireless ap

 

[microchip]

Well, you will get a decent Gigabit performance from pretty much any mid to top range router. I also have a low-end TP-Link Gigabit router that I used to use a year or so ago before I bought the ASUS and the Archer C7. Even when it is a low-end router, the performance was good enough for me on the LAN. My internet connection is 120Mbps (~ 115Mbps practical) so I couldn't test that side of things by pushing it to close to Gigabit speed on the WAN but since the LAN part was good, I suspect it will have not much issues in also having a good WAN to LAN. I could be wrong on that, though. It could be trick since LAN to LAN is switched instead of routed while WAN to LAN is routed so I honestly don't know how much it'll perform

This being said, when getting a router, it's not only important to look at its performance but also what it offers for services (you didn't mention anything about that). I mean things like QoS, VPN ,SSH, Telnet, Parental Control, Guest Network, etc, etc. Most of the low-end routers do not offer these advanced features so if you intend to use one or more of these things, you need to look for a router on the mid to higher end.

And yes, if you put the router in a metal box, it'll act as a Faraday cage so it will definitely have a big effect on the wireless side. You could workaround this by connecting an AP and using that only for your wifi needs

EDIT: Ubiquity is a brand that makes very decent routers and other network equipment. It targets mostly the SOHO market but many people also use them in home networks

 

[soontobetold]

Well, you will get a decent Gigabit performance from pretty much any mid to top range router. I also have a low-end TP-Link Gigabit router that I used to use a year or so ago before I bought the ASUS and the Archer C7. Even when it is a low-end router, the performance was good enough for me on the LAN. My internet connection is 120Mbps (~ 115Mbps practical) so I couldn't test that side of things by pushing it to close to Gigabit speed on the WAN but since the LAN part was good, I suspect it will have not much issues in also having a good WAN to LAN. I could be wrong on that, though. It could be trick since LAN to LAN is switched instead of routed while WAN to LAN is routed so I honestly don't know how much it'll perform

This being said, when getting a router, it's not only important to look at its performance but also what it offers for services (you didn't mention anything about that). I mean things like QoS, VPN ,SSH, Telnet, Parental Control, Guest Network, etc, etc. Most of the low-end routers do not offer these advanced features so if you intend to use one or more of these things, you need to look for a router on the mid to higher end.

And yes, if you put the router in a metal box, it'll act as a Faraday cage so it will definitely have a big effect on the wireless side. You could workaround this by connecting an AP and using that only for your wifi needs

EDIT: Ubiquity is a brand that makes very decent routers and other network equipment. It targets mostly the SOHO market but many people also use them in home networks

What's WAN to LAN and LAN to WAN? How is it important?

WAN = Internet?

Of these few things that you have mentioned "QoS, VPN ,SSH, Telnet, Parental Control, Guest Network, etc, etc."

I think I only know the purpose of Parental Control and Guest Network which I do not actually need to use.

So I should just stick with the DIR-865L as my wired router and use APs?

I just do not want my wired router to bottleneck my wireless APs speed

 

[microchip]

WAN = Wide Area Network = Internet or some other big network, outside of your own in your house

When you do WAN to LAN or LAN to WAN, it puts more stress on the router since the data is routed. When you transfer stuff inside your own local network (eg, LAN to LAN) the data is switched

Look at it at this simple way: switches make the networks while routers connect them with each other

And yes, a DIR-865L will be enough I think. No, it won't bottleneck you wireless speeds, provided you get a Gigabit AP on the wireless. The router will basically pass everything to the AP, so the AP needs a Gigabit LAN port (for router -> AP) and a Gigabit wireless in case you want Gigabit wifi

 

[soontobetold]

WAN = Wide Area Network = Internet or some other big network, outside of your own in your house

When you do WAN to LAN or LAN to WAN, it puts more stress on the router since the data is routed. When you transfer stuff inside your own local network (eg, LAN to LAN) the data is switched

Look at it at this simple way: switches make the networks while routers connect them with each other

And yes, a DIR-865L will be enough I think. No, it won't bottleneck you wireless speeds, provided you get a Gigabit AP on the wireless. The router will basically pass everything to the AP, so the AP needs a Gigabit LAN port (for router -> AP) and a Gigabit wireless in case you want Gigabit wifi

Hey thanks! You have been very helpful!

I am looking at the Asus EA-N66, 3-in-1 AP/Wi-Fi Bridge/ Range Extender. I will be using it as an AP. Do you have any comments on that? Do you reckon I should get cheaper AC router and use it as an AP?

 

[microchip]

Hey thanks! You have been very helpful!

I am looking at the Asus EA-N66, 3-in-1 AP/Wi-Fi Bridge/ Range Extender. I will be using it as an AP. Do you have any comments on that? Do you reckon I should get cheaper AC router and use it as an AP?

Well, that AP looks like it can do a max of N, so no AC which means no Gigabit wifi which means even if your router pushes more than the APs maximum throughput (450Mbps) it will not be able to deliver what the router sends. For example, if the router sends, say, 600Mbps to the AP, the AP will deliver max of theoretical 450Mbps. I do not know if this is enough for you

If you want more, you have 2 options: one is look for an AP that supports AC, thus provides Gigabit wifi. Two is look for an AC router which also provides Gigabit wifi

I don't follow AP products myself but if you want to use another router as AP, you basically do the following.

1) login into the router that will be used as an AP

2) disable its DHCP server so it can't assign IPs to connected devices to it.. the IPs will be assigned by the main router when a client connects to the AP

3) Set the LAN part of the router AP to let's say 192.168.1.100 and look up the MAC address of the LAN

3) Go to your main router (DIR865L) and go to its DHCP settings. In there use the MAC address you got of the AP router and enter it into the reserved list of the DHCP together with the 192.168.1.100 address. This will make the DHCP server of the main router always assign the same IP address to the AP router

4) Connect the router AP from one of the LAN ports to one of the LAN ports of the main router (DIR865L)

5) You may need to reboot the router AP after you disable its DHCP. This is router specific. Some need it some don't but most of the time the router will tell you to reboot it or it'll do that on its own.

 

[soontobetold]

Well, that AP looks like it can do a max of N, so no AC which means no Gigabit wifi which means even if your router pushes more than the APs maximum throughput (450Mbps) it will not be able to deliver what the router sends. For example, if the router sends, say, 600Mbps to the AP, the AP will deliver max of theoretical 450Mbps. I do not know if this is enough for you

If you want more, you have 2 options: one is look for an AP that supports AC, thus provides Gigabit wifi. Two is look for an AC router which also provides Gigabit wifi

I don't follow AP products myself but if you want to use another router as AP, you basically do the following.

1) login into the router that will be used as an AP

2) disable its DHCP server so it can't assign IPs to connected devices to it.. the IPs will be assigned by the main router when a client connects to the AP

3) Set the LAN part of the router AP to let's say 192.168.1.100 and look up the MAC address of the LAN

3) Go to your main router (DIR865L) and go to its DHCP settings. In there use the MAC address you got of the AP router and enter it into the reserved list of the DHCP together with the 192.168.1.100 address. This will make the DHCP server of the main router always assign the same IP address to the AP router

4) Connect the router AP from one of the LAN ports to one of the LAN ports of the main router (DIR865L)

5) You may need to reboot the router AP after you disable its DHCP. This is router specific. Some need it some don't but most of the time the router will tell you to reboot it or it'll do that on its own.

Yea I understand it's only N standard, but the options of AC standard APs aren't that many right now or at least where I am located. So I was thinking just get the "BEST" N standard AP and upgrade in the future when the prices are also lower.

Yea I understand that I can utilise a router as an AP and disable the router function. But I'll have to see whether it's worth the money.

Anyway I came across this D-Link DAP-1665. Any comments about D-Link products in general? From my understand it's 300mpbs on 2.4ghz and 867mbps on 5ghz. The 2.4ghz speed is actually lower than what the Asus AP can offer me. Any comments?

 

[microchip]

Yea I understand it's only N standard, but the options of AC standard APs aren't that many right now or at least where I am located. So I was thinking just get the "BEST" N standard AP and upgrade in the future when the prices are also lower.

Yea I understand that I can utilise a router as an AP and disable the router function. But I'll have to see whether it's worth the money.

Anyway I came across this D-Link DAP-1665. Any comments about D-Link products in general? From my understand it's 300mpbs on 2.4ghz and 867mbps on 5ghz. The 2.4ghz speed is actually lower than what the Asus AP can offer me. Any comments?

Yes, AP using AC are scarce today but it will improve

My comments are mixed when it comes to D-Link, Netgear and Linksys. Some have major problems with these brand, some don't. But again, some also have major problems with ASUS or other brands too. It could be a hit and miss. I personally don't have problems with my AC66U but there are quite a few that do have.

Depends on which devices you'll connect. If you say "I only have N devices and will use them for 2 or 3 or more years, without getting AC ones" , I'd suggest the ASUS since it's faster on the 2.4 band. If you say "look, I have N devices currently but would like to future-proof a bit and will get 5GHz AC ones in the future and will lower my use of the N devices, *and* I can live with the lower throughput on the 2.4 band for a while" then I'd recommend the D-Link