Wireless Home Network - WDS-intensive

[fnienstadt]

I have setup my home network anchored on a DD-WRT-based router/gateway supporting simultaneous 2.4Ghz (g) and 5GHz (n) radios. WAN via Cable modem.

The 5 Ghz (n) side connects to 2 other n routers via WDS. These routers act as "bridges" in a home office and a media room (desktops and other gear are connected to the "bridges" via ethernet cables) with good amounts of traffic

The 2.4GHz (g) side does 2 things:

- Provides g wireless access to laptops/ipads/tablets throughout the home
- Connects to 3 other g routers acting as bridges via WDS in 3 separate rooms. In each room, TVs/Bluray/Roku/AppleTV etc... are connected to the bridges via ethernet cables.

This has worked well so far, but I wonder if I can do better.

Questions:
1) Can the performance of this network be significantly improved by changing the configuration (i.e. no WDS)? I've heard WDS is not very "efficient" in its use of bandwidth.

2) now all the "router" functions (i.e. DHCP, etc...) are performed by the centralized gateway connected to the cable modem. Should I de-centralized this function?

3) what other options do I have in terms or the network configuration/topology?

Thanks in advance for your suggestions.

 

[thiggins]

You are not using WDS to repeat, i.e. wireless-to-wireless. So you're not paying the 50% throughput penalty.

Using 5 GHz as backhaul, however might be reducing signal more, which can reduce throughput.

Those second level 2.4 GHz bridges, are probably not providing much throughput.

Unless you need multiple, separated subnets, keep one router and let the wireless stuff just be wireless.

I think running some throughput tests would be helpful so that you can see where your highest throughput losses are.

I'd also get a pair of 200 or 500 Mbps powerline adapters to experiment. A pair of 200 Mbps adapters should provide about 40 Mbps of steady throughput. Doubtful you are getting that from your wireless bridges.

 

[fnienstadt]

Hi Tim,

Thanks for the reply.

So, if I understand your suggestions:

1) Stay with a single router/gateway providing wireless access both in 2.4 g and 5.0 n bands

2) Connect to the network via wireless access whenever possible (TVs, Bluray, Roku, AppleTV, etc...) rather than via the bridges

3) for remote wired access try using powerline ethernet adapters (much better throughput than bridges/WDS)

4) basically stop using WDS if possible.

Did I understand correctly?

Thanks again

federico

 

[thiggins]

1) Stay with a single router/gateway providing wireless access both in 2.4 g and 5.0 n bands

Yes

2) Connect to the network via wireless access whenever possible (TVs, Bluray, Roku, AppleTV, etc...) rather than via the bridges

No. Connect via Ethernet or powerline whereever possible.

3) for remote wired access try using powerline ethernet adapters (much better throughput than bridges/WDS)

Yes. You will need to run experiments to see if throughput is better with powerline vs. wireless. But unless you have high powerline noise sources, it should be. You should measure your current throughput at different points in your current setup so that you can make informed decisions about changes.

4) basically stop using WDS if possible.

Not quite. You are using WDS to bridge, vs. repeat. So you do not get the 50% retransmission throughput loss. So if you must use wireless to connect network segments, it doesn't matter whether it is via WDS or plain bridge (non-WDS).

 

[stevech]

using power line... be sure to avoid plugging modems into a plug strip which has surge protector filters. Or into a wall outlet which also has a PC or TV. These tend to attenuate the signal and reduce speeds.