Wireless Repeating help

[osmosizzz]

Hello guys and gals. I'm new to this forum. Please bare with me.

I have a netgear WNDR3400 set up as my main router at a church building and we need have the majority of the building covered with WiFi signal. I have been reading for some time now and came to conclusion that we should get a couple (5-8) WN2500RP repeaters to grab signal at 5ghz band and extends the signal with the 2.4 ghz band. I chose this router because it has the 2 bands so my transfer speeds won't be cut in half as an article here stated and because we can use wpa2.

My main concern is being able to get as much of the 15mbps/3mbps speeds provided by isp in most places we throughout the church. We won't be transferring files so the throughput speeds are not that important. Do you think that set up will work? What other repeaters would you recommend? All we want to do is extend one signal everywhere and maintain speed constancy. The church is 4 stories. its somewhat large.

Thank you for the time and patience.

Sent from my X909 using Tapatalk 2

 

[stevech]

Most people have frustrating recurring problems with WiFi "WDS" (repeaters"). Incompatibilities with the main / root. Each repeater costs 1/2 the speed, DHCP relay, etc.

Better to use Access Points (AP) to improve coverage (esp. in the weakest-link, that being the user to WiFi direction which is not usually displayed as bars).

The APs may be re-purposed common WiFi routers.

The APs connect to the main router via wire, be that cat5 cables, HomePlug/Power line, or existing cable TV coax. These can daisy-chain among APs, with the use of cheap Ethernet switches.

 

[osmosizzz]

I cannot do with the cat 5 cabling because it's a large building. I think I'm going to go forth with spreading out repeaters. Now, Ford anyone know if dual band routers natively can use one band to receive and the other to transmit? I want to use the 5ghz to receive and the 2.4ghz to transmit. That's possible correct?

Sent from my X909 using Tapatalk 2

 

[thiggins]

Simultaneous dual-band routers (N600, N750, N900) operate on both bands simultaneously. So you can use one band for "backhaul" and the other to support clients.

Try to use a "star" connection as much as possible, i.e. each repeater connecting back to the central AP/router to avoid losing bandwidth.

Keep in mind that 5 GHz range won't be as great as 2.4.

You might also look at Amped Wireless products. Specifically the SR20000G.

 

[osmosizzz]

Simultaneous dual-band routers (N600, N750, N900) operate on both bands simultaneously. So you can use one band for "backhaul" and the other to support clients.

Try to use a "star" connection as much as possible, i.e. each repeater connecting back to the central AP/router to avoid losing bandwidth.

Keep in mind that 5 GHz range won't be as great as 2.4.

You might also look at Amped Wireless products. Specifically the SR20000G.

I began looking at the amped wireless that was suggested and we are thinking of going with that one however, the feature that is missing is the fast lane one that net gear has which uses one band to receive signal and the other to output which eliminates degradation of speed. My concern is not transfer speeds but actual internet speeds. If my internet speed does not suffer much from a router taking in signal at the 2.4ghz and shooting it back out in the same band then it would be smarter to just get the amped wireless sr10000 and use the 2.4ghz band correct?

Sent from my X909 using Tapatalk 2

 

[thiggins]

Using a single radio to receive then retransmit cuts throughput in half.
Depending on where you place the repeater, you could throttle your Internet bandwidth.

 

[osmosizzz]

Using a single radio to receive then retransmit cuts throughput in half.
Depending on where you place the repeater, you could throttle your Internet bandwidth.

So basically repeating on the same radio does not affect internet bandwidth. Only distance does that correct?

Sent from my X909 using Tapatalk 2

 

[stevech]

So basically repeating on the same radio does not affect internet bandwidth. Only distance does that correct?

Sent from my X909 using Tapatalk 2

No, a "WDS" WiFi repeater, a.k.a. Range Externder, halves the speed. It may not affect your INTERNET speed, as follows.

Suppose your WiFi WDS repeater is able to get a signal strength from the WiFi router that is very good, such that the bit rate on that link is, say, x Mbps. Now, let's assume that the client device is also getting a good signal FROM the WDS repeater. The WDS will reduce the speed from client to router by one half. But that reduced speed can still be much greater than the ISP speed you get.

But generally these strong signals don't prevail. And the 50% reduction due to WDS does slow the WiFi down so it now is slower than the ISP's speed.

 

[osmosizzz]

No, a "WDS" WiFi repeater, a.k.a. Range Externder, halves the speed. It may not affect your INTERNET speed, as follows.

Suppose your WiFi WDS repeater is able to get a signal strength from the WiFi router that is very good, such that the bit rate on that link is, say, x Mbps. Now, let's assume that the client device is also getting a good signal FROM the WDS repeater. The WDS will reduce the speed from client to router by one half. But that reduced speed can still be much greater than the ISP speed you get.

But generally these strong signals don't prevail. And the 50% reduction due to WDS does slow the WiFi down so it now is slower than the ISP's speed.

Awesome! Were going to run a star formation of repeaters where each one connects to the main router . Also going to use the amped wireless. Thanks a lot. Really appreciated!

Sent from my X909 using Tapatalk 2

 

[devnull]

I cannot do with the cat 5 cabling because it's a large building.

This statement doesn't make sense to me. How is running ethernet cable more problematic than using wireless repeaters due to size of the building?

 

[osmosizzz]

This statement doesn't make sense to me. How is running ethernet cable more problematic than using wireless repeaters due to size of the building?

We don't want to run wires everywhere. From where the router is to the spots with most traffic, we are talking about large distances which will require serious amounts of cables. So we are just going with the high powered repeater.

Sent from my X909 using Tapatalk 2

 

[njwhite2]

Have you considered high powered access point

This writer has probably moved on with his solution by now, but I am posting this in case others are reading it in search of a similar solution.

I recently installed a Ubiquiti Picostation M2HP high powered outdoor access point at a marina. The coverage was phenomenal.

This unit can be used indoors or out. For $76 shipped on Amazon, you can plug one of these into your existing router and test coverage of the whole building. I would expect that one of these units, properly located, would supply good 150 Mbps WiFi to all corners of any church I have ever been in. They are available in both 2.4 GHz and 5 Ghz, though the 5 Ghz unit can be expected to provide slightly less coverage area due to it's sorter wavelength.

You could use power-line adapters to position others at different locations in the church (building) should more than one be required.

They will also accept dd-wrt and can be used as wireless repeaters, etc.