Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Electronics Repair (sci.electronics.repair) Discussion of repairing electronic equipment. Topics include requests for assistance, where to obtain servicing information and parts, techniques for diagnosis and repair, and annecdotes about success, failures and problems. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
Posted to alt.internet.wireless,alt.home.repair,sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Straightforward out-of-the-box solution for extending WiFi range
The Daring Dufas wrote: On 12/24/2013 11:41 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote: The Daring Dufas wrote: I call it dueling routers. ^_^ As opposed to dualing routers? ;-) Or the dualism of routers. ^_^ That bytes! ;-) -- Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to have a DD214, and a honorable discharge. |
#42
Posted to alt.internet.wireless,alt.home.repair,sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Straightforward out-of-the-box solution for extending WiFi range
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 16:23:01 -0800, DevilsPGD
wrote: In the last episode of , Tony Hwang said: Do you use inSSIDer pro version or even free version? I think having same SSID is not good. Won't it create confusion when connecting? If the underlying networks are bridged, this is a supported configuration and it allows client machines to move between the access points seamlessly. If the networks are not bridged, this will cause IP conflicts and other problems. If they aren't bridged, they're probably routed. Then, if each segment has a unique IP address space, it should just work. But if each segment has the same IP address space, the main problem won't be IP conflicts but rather IP routing issues. The IP stack will treat it as Layer 2 but it needs to be treated as Layer 3. I assume that's the "other problems" mentioned above. |
#43
Posted to alt.internet.wireless,alt.home.repair,sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Straightforward out-of-the-box solution for extending WiFirange
On Wed, 25 Dec 2013 14:47:48 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Everything I write is interesting. Sometimes, it's even accurate. Heh heh ... |
#44
Posted to alt.internet.wireless,alt.home.repair,sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Straightforward out-of-the-box solution for extending WiFi range
On Wed, 25 Dec 2013 23:10:50 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote: wrote: On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 12:41:31 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: The Daring Dufas wrote: I call it dueling routers. ^_^ As opposed to dualing routers? ;-) I have five but they just make sawdust. Stop using them on ultra liberal idiots, and let the termites finish them off. Nah, it's too hard to clean the routers after. The brains and guts are too small to be a problem but the blood gets everywhere. |
#45
Posted to alt.internet.wireless,alt.home.repair,sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Straightforward out-of-the-box solution for extending WiFi range
In the last episode of ,
Char Jackson said: On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 16:23:01 -0800, DevilsPGD wrote: In the last episode of , Tony Hwang said: Do you use inSSIDer pro version or even free version? I think having same SSID is not good. Won't it create confusion when connecting? If the underlying networks are bridged, this is a supported configuration and it allows client machines to move between the access points seamlessly. If the networks are not bridged, this will cause IP conflicts and other problems. If they aren't bridged, they're probably routed. Then, if each segment has a unique IP address space, it should just work. But if each segment has the same IP address space, the main problem won't be IP conflicts but rather IP routing issues. The IP stack will treat it as Layer 2 but it needs to be treated as Layer 3. I assume that's the "other problems" mentioned above. The issue is more that when a mobile device jumps from one access point to another (with the same SSID), it'll attempt to re-use it's existing IP and ARP the default gateway. If the default gateway has the expected MAC address it's assumed to be the same network and the device can proceed as though nothing changed. If the APR test succeeds, the total network interruption time is that of one ARP lookup, which is probably on the order of 100ms-200ms, which is barely noticed by the user. Small networks will be even faster, obviously. If the ARP fails, or returns a different MAC address, the device will silently drop it's IP and start a new DHCP request. This is fine, but it will cause a momentary interruption in traffic from the user's perspective, possibly lasting long enough to generate application level errors. In this case, using a different SSID is better because a smart device may track past DHCP allocations and use the quick-start process described above when returning to a SSID it recognizes, within it's original DHCP lifespan. -- 'Outlook not so good.' That magic 8-ball knows everything! |
#46
Posted to alt.internet.wireless,alt.home.repair,sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Straightforward out-of-the-box solution for extending WiFirange
On Wed, 25 Dec 2013 19:43:15 +0000, Danny D. wrote:
Interesting. I've got SNMP on all the Ubiquit radios, and, Hi Jeff, I had SNMP turned on all along in the rooftop radio; but I'm not sure how to take advantage of it. I set up the radio, but, I also provided my password to my WISP; and I know he logged in and rebooted the radio a few times when I first set it up because he had warned me that he was going to "adjust" some settings. So, he's using the SNMP, but I can't even spell it. I've got a lot of reading to do, I guess, to take advantage of whatever it does for me. |
#47
Posted to alt.internet.wireless,alt.home.repair,sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Straightforward out-of-the-box solution for extending WiFi range
On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 06:42:58 +0000 (UTC), "Danny D."
wrote: On Wed, 25 Dec 2013 19:43:15 +0000, Danny D. wrote: Interesting. I've got SNMP on all the Ubiquit radios, and, I had SNMP turned on all along in the rooftop radio; but I'm not sure how to take advantage of it. Also, you seem to have missed my last message on SNMP. https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=alt.internet.wireless/fMLTzEHlzE8/B_-qhgqAXGcJ You can't do much with the free version of PRTG, but it's an easy start. If not, go find another MIB browser. http://www.ireasoning.com/mibbrowser.shtml or SNMP graphing program. http://oss.oetiker.ch/mrtg/ If you have a web server handy, use RRDTool and a template for Cacti such as: http://docs.cacti.net/usertemplate:host:scgrab:ubiquiti http://community.ubnt.com/t5/airMax-General-Discussion/Cacti-Host-template-for-AirOS-5-5/td-p/331019 Note that the Ubiquiti supplied MIB for the various models is rather limited, but does work for most common things. The rest will need to be scraped from various configuration web page until Ubiquiti decides to update the MIBs. Or, you can have someone else do the monitoring for you: http://www.odmon.com Useless for troubleshooting a broken internet link because the data goes over the internet. I set up the radio, but, I also provided my password to my WISP; and I know he logged in and rebooted the radio a few times when I first set it up because he had warned me that he was going to "adjust" some settings. With SNMP, I don't believe that he needs your admin password. The SNMP read and write community name acts as a password. So, he's using the SNMP, but I can't even spell it. I've got a lot of reading to do, I guess, to take advantage of whatever it does for me. Most WISP's use SNMP in some form for remote management and monitoring. You might ask him what software (probably Nagios) he's using. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#48
Posted to alt.internet.wireless,alt.home.repair,sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Straightforward out-of-the-box solution for extending WiFi range
On Wed, 25 Dec 2013 14:47:48 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: ~ However ... just guessing ... it would seem to me ~ that, if we use the same SSID, that the STRONGEST ~ should win, and, if one disconnects, it *should* ~ (logically anyway) switch seamlessly over to the ~ stronger signal as the person roams the home. ~ ~ http://www.intel.com/support/wireless/wlan/sb/cs-015906.htm ~ Fat chance. That's the way it should work. Instead, what happens is ~ that the client will remain connected to the initial access point, no ~ matter how weak or disgusting a signal it offers. Even if turn off ~ the client device, it will try to reconnect to the same initial access ~ point, even if there's a stronger/better signal with the same SSID ~ evailable. Even if you intentionally disconnect, the client will ~ retain the MAC address of the initial access point. When you try to ~ reconnect, it will try that MAC address first. ~ ~ Intel seems to have gotten the clue and offers a setting as to how ~ "aggressive" the client will act in retaining a connection: ~ http://www.intel.com/support/wireless/wlan/sb/CS-030101.htm ~ It's not a total solution, but does work rather well on my various ~ laptops. I think you're being overly pessimistic, Jeff. The scenario where you have multiple APs advertising the same SSID on different non-overlapping channels (where all BSSIDs are bridged to the same L2 broadcast domain), actually works pretty well with most clients nowadays. Our large customers often have buildings or campuses with dozens or even hundreds or thousands of APs all offering the same SSID, and most modern clients can roam throughout these coverage areas without losing more than one or two seconds of data connectivity at roam time. Most clients do offchannel scans for other APs will associated, so they know what all other APs are out there (although the freshness of that information will vary.) They are apt to decide to roam based upon one or more factors like these: * currently associated BSSID has dropped below a given RSSI threshold (e.g. below -80 dBm) * there exists a better BSSID whose RSSI is more than threshold k stronger than the current one, so let's roam to it (e.g. k=15, so if the current BSSID's RSSI is -74 dBm and another AP is at -57, let's go there) * n consecutive 802.11 retransmissions to the current BSSID have failed (e.g. where n=32) * n consective beacons from the current BSSID have been missed (e.g. where n=10, i.e. ~1 second) To be sure, in networks that are very large and/or have very stringent performance requirements (hospitals), exotic roaming schemes involving L3 tunneling, 802.11r, CCKM, WPA2 PMKID caching etc. can be called for. But for home/small organization networks, basic WPA2/PSK roaming across APs within a given SSID will work just fine (again, assuming that all of these BSSIDs are bridged to the same broadcast domain.) Cheers, Aaron |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Extending a wall | UK diy | |||
Just now, it enters a steel too cosmetic toward her straightforward stair. | Home Repair | |||
extending hearth | UK diy | |||
Extending over a well | UK diy | |||
Extending Wires | UK diy |