What would be a better solution?

[reddevil0728]

Context

• House is wired up with CAT6
• Currently using TP-Link Archer AX72
• Coverage at home is bad
• In a previous house, my setup includes a more powerful router as the main router, with 2x less powerful router in Access Point mode connected to the main router via CAT6.
• This was before the era of Mesh Network
• Initial intention is to do a similar setup in the new house, but instead of getting 2x less powerful router, which is not aesthetic pleasing (and those that are, would not be of good specs) to use with the existing Archer AX72, looking at Mesh (e.g., TP-Link Deco X68) which I understand that can work as an AP and can be wired to the main router (in this case Archer AX72).

Questions

• I realised from this write-up, it seems like mesh network with wired backhaul has seemless handoff but Router + AP may not be. Is that the case?
• If the above is the case, does it make more sense to just dump the AX72 and get a 3-pack mesh nodes and use it with wired backhaul?
• Or would it be better to just keep the AX72, and then get a 2-pack mesh nodes and use it in AP mode but connected to AX72 via wire?
• Or any other more elegant solution that makes sense?

 

[degrub]

mesh is just marketing term.
floor plan sketches with location of cat6 terminations and rough dimensions
location of ISP termination/router ?
interior and exterior wall construction ?
multi level ?

what type of clients and rough numbers ? Hardwired/wireless ?

An all Deco system may just work
Too much RF power can cause more problems than too little due to overlap and reflections. Have you done a signal level survey ?
Neighbor wireless interference ?

If you have long distances or large number of wall penetrations for RF, a multi AP , low power RF may work better than the typical single router blast it out residential consumer approach. If Deco doesn't work out, try TP-Link Omada with OC200 controller.

 

[Tech9]

I realised from this write-up, it seems like mesh network with wired backhaul has seemless handoff but Router + AP may not be. Is that the case?

This is not the case. The client decides where to connect and there is no really "seamless handoff" even with high-end business class systems. For better roaming you need controller based multi-AP system. They use additional tricks to encourage client switching. UniFi or Omada are lower priced options.

 

[coxhaus]

Don't forget Cisco small business wireless solutions. I think the Cisco AP 150ax APs work well and have built-in controllers so no separate one needs to be bought. Plus, it can't cause a bottle neck if it gets put on a saturated link. They are reasonably priced for home use at $102 each. In my mind the best solution.

 

[reddevil0728]

mesh is just marketing term.

Yea that's what I thought. They seems to be like essentially either and extender if you are doing wireless backhaul or an access point if you are doing wired backhaul.

It's just that their software makes it more user friendly to set up than a typical extender / ap, hence they market it as a mesh?

Is my understanding right?

floor plan sketches with location of cat6 terminations and rough dimensions
location of ISP termination/router ?
interior and exterior wall construction ?
multi level ?

what type of clients and rough numbers ? Hardwired/wireless ?

An all Deco system may just work
Too much RF power can cause more problems than too little due to overlap and reflections. Have you done a signal level survey ?
Neighbor wireless interference ?

If you have long distances or large number of wall penetrations for RF, a multi AP , low power RF may work better than the typical single router blast it out residential consumer approach. If Deco doesn't work out, try TP-Link Omada with OC200 controller.

Actually I am already quite certain about what I need till I read that article, hence just wanted some clarifications to "catch-up" with technology.

QNS 1: I am looking to get APs... I know I can get cheaper routers to work as APs, but a more elegant solution would be getting mesh nodes as APs. Just wanted to confirm my understanding is right that mesh nodes can be used as APs?

This is not the case. The client decides where to connect and there is no really "seamless handoff" even with high-end business class systems. For better roaming you need controller based multi-AP system. They use additional tricks to encourage client switching. UniFi or Omada are lower priced options.

Don't forget Cisco small business wireless solutions. I think the Cisco AP 150ax APs work well and have built-in controllers so no separate one needs to be bought. Plus, it can't cause a bottle neck if it gets put on a saturated link. They are reasonably priced for home use at $102 each. In my mind the best solution.

I got thrown off by the article that I read, hence I need a 2nd question to clarify understanding.

QNS 2: So you are saying, a Mesh network may not necessarily have a better "seamless handoff"? Because in the past when I was using a main router with 2x secondary routers connected to the main router using wire to act as APs, I thought the handoff was quite ok.

But some people suggested rather than...

1. Keep the main router, and get Mesh Nodes to act as APs using wire to connect directly to main router...

Just...

2. Get rid of the main router entirely and just set up a mesh network with wired backhaul because of the better "seemless handoff"

What makes more sense?

For the avoidance of doubts, I have the infrastructure for everything to be wired, hence I don't have to fall back on any wireless backhaul which will cut performance.

 

[sfx2000]

Don't forget Cisco small business wireless solutions. I think the Cisco AP 150ax APs work well and have built-in controllers so no separate one needs to be bought. Plus, it can't cause a bottle neck if it gets put on a saturated link. They are reasonably priced for home use at $102 each. In my mind the best solution.

Good mention - the Cisco AP150's are more focused on capacity per AP - think corp/enterprise or hotels where there is a shedload of clients...

It's a challenge to determine what the right KPI's to track...

Most consumer AP/Routers max out at 32 clients per radio - some do 50...

Each client takes resources from the AP - even in an IOT rich environment where the traffic load is low, but the number of connections is high...

@thiggins - how to best define this - we've got tools like iMIX and Flent - but those tend to be biased towards wired connections...

 

[reddevil0728]

Good mention - the Cisco AP150's are more focused on capacity per AP - think corp/enterprise or hotels where there is a shedload of clients...

It's a challenge to determine what the right KPI's to track...

Most consumer AP/Routers max out at 32 clients per radio - some do 50...

Each client takes resources from the AP - even in an IOT rich environment where the traffic load is low, but the number of connections is high...

@thiggins - how to best define this - we've got tools like iMIX and Flent - but those tend to be biased towards wired connections...

I don’t think I need something that fancy

 

[Tech9]

So you are saying, a Mesh network may not necessarily have a better "seamless handoff"?

First off, mesh network is wireless only. There is no mesh with wired backhaul. Some consumer products marketing invented it. Wired systems use multiple access points. Roaming is client decision in all cases. Some business systems encourage roaming by learning the environment, tracking clients and dynamically adjusting transmit power. Some do additionally type of beamforming in hardware with antenna arrays also used for roaming assist. The more fancy proprietary technologies the higher the price. Consumer products mostly rely on the client. Some clients will switch faster, some will stick longer to weak access point further away. You can't change this behavior unless you can play with individual client settings.

 

[reddevil0728]

First off, mesh network is wireless only. There is no mesh with wired backhaul. Some consumer products marketing invented it. Wired systems use multiple access points. Roaming is client decision in all cases. Some business systems encourage roaming by learning the environment, tracking clients and dynamically adjusting transmit power. Some do additionally type of beamforming in hardware with antenna arrays also used for roaming assist. The more fancy proprietary technologies the higher the price. Consumer products mostly rely on the client. Some clients will switch faster, some will stick longer to weak access point further away. You can't change this behavior unless you can play with individual client settings.

Maybe I’m over simplifying things as I’m not too familiar.

I’m looking at TP-Link Deco X68 it has 2x Ethernet ports, which I understand allows wired backhaul.

Is my understanding incorrect?

 

[degrub]

I don’t think I need something that fancy

It's not fancy. It just works once set up. i have 4 cisco WAP371s and a RV325 using VLANs. Only using 5GHz bands. Have not had to touch them for anything other than firmware updates in over 5 years.
5 users - 1 gamer college student, 2 college students, 2 adults work from home. Worked from DSL 38Mbit/s down, 3 Up to current Gbit fiber ISP. Nary a hiccup.

If i was doing over today - cisco WAP150s +VLAN router or TP-Link Omada APs + OC200 and VLAN router. i wouldn't even glance at ASUS. I do support my parents house with an ASUS AC router+AP setup but their needs are minimal.
With multiple APs you can distribute as needed and adjust power levels to get solid coverage and roaming. Unless you are lucky with the building size and construction, this approach seems to be most reliable for clients versus the single consumer WAP blast 'em out approach which can also play havoc with the neighbors and internal coverage (high reflections)

 

[coxhaus]

I don’t think I need something that fancy

Not fancy, very functional.

 

[TheLostSwede]

I've been running a mix of devices from 2-3 different brands and never had a problem with wireless handoff between them. One router, the other two as wired AP's over the past few years.

 

[coxhaus]

I've been running a mix of devices from 2-3 different brands and never had a problem with wireless handoff between them. One router, the other two as wired AP's over the past few years.

How is your Wi-Fi calling and roaming? That is the big one for me. I need my iPhone to roam when I am talking on a voice call.

 

[TheLostSwede]

How is your Wi-Fi calling and roaming? That is the big one for me. I need my iPhone to roam when I am talking on a voice call.

I never had any issue with calls cutting off when moving between the floors, as that was in a three storey home, with 2-3 rooms per floor, although the first floor has a 3.5 meter ceiling height or so. The building was all steel and concrete and even the 2.4 GHz signal wasn't strong enough to reach the 2nd floor reliably. I had a wireless range extender on the third floor for a couple of years, but it disconnected from the AP on the 2nd floor from time to time, so I ended up wiring it up in the end and it made everything rock solid in the entire place. Note that most of the equipment was 802.11ac and over the years I've had a mix of Netgear, TP-Link, Asus and Securifi hardware. Some with OpenWRT, some with DDR-WRT, but most where running stock firmware or a variant by Merlin or Voxel. I've never had any issues roaming between the floors, nor any issues with hand-offs between the AP's, most likely due to there being enough distance between them. I believe people are having issues when the device being used can't decide which AP to use, so it keeps jumping between two AP's with similar signal strength.

 

[reddevil0728]

It's not fancy. It just works once set up. i have 4 cisco WAP371s and a RV325 using VLANs. Only using 5GHz bands. Have not had to touch them for anything other than firmware updates in over 5 years.
5 users - 1 gamer college student, 2 college students, 2 adults work from home. Worked from DSL 38Mbit/s down, 3 Up to current Gbit fiber ISP. Nary a hiccup.

If i was doing over today - cisco WAP150s +VLAN router or TP-Link Omada APs + OC200 and VLAN router. i wouldn't even glance at ASUS. I do support my parents house with an ASUS AC router+AP setup but their needs are minimal.
With multiple APs you can distribute as needed and adjust power levels to get solid coverage and roaming. Unless you are lucky with the building size and construction, this approach seems to be most reliable for clients versus the single consumer WAP blast 'em out approach which can also play havoc with the neighbors and internal coverage (high reflections)

Not fancy, very functional.

Anyway I unfortunately do not have the luxury of CISCO in my market.

So I am primarily looking at WAP options. Thinking Deco would be the most elegant solution and also cause I am using a TP-Link router.

Any thoughts?

 

[thiggins]

how to best define this

Define what?

 

[coxhaus]

Mesh networks have nothing to do with wireless networks. Layer 1 does not apply. Mesh networking existed before wireless was invented. It is the way a network is setup based on whether it is a mesh setup or not.

Mesh networking - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[TheLostSwede]

Mesh networks have nothing to do with wireless networks. Layer 1 does not apply. Mesh networking existed before wireless was invented. It is the way a network is setup based on whether it is a mesh setup or not.

Mesh networking - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Except that doesn't apply to consumer WiFi Mesh networks, funnily enough...

 

[coxhaus]

Except that doesn't apply to consumer WiFi Mesh networks, funnily enough...

Yes, it does. Mesh networking was coined for Wireless networks by some ad hoc marketing department to sell more wireless routers. Read the definition in Wikipedia. It barely meets the specs but it is not really used as a mesh network. It is all marketing crap................................

Like I said Mesh networking existed before wireless existed.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Yes, it does. Mesh networking was coined for Wireless networks by some ad hoc marketing department to sell more wireless routers. Read the definition in Wikipedia. It barely meets the specs but it is not really used as a mesh network. It is all marketing crap................................

Like I said Mesh networking existed before wireless existed.

I think you misread my comment, the consumer version is as you say, barely a mesh network, so it doesn't really apply to what's being marketed as mesh networking.