House is quite large, so had difficulties with Wi-Fi upstairs.

2-3 years ago I ran a Cat cable from the switch to the attic and put one
of these there, configured as an access point:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/TP-Link-TL-.../dp/B076ZX32BR

All worked well until a few days ago where I managed to bust it whilst
walking past...

Now looking for a better device: Dual band, 300 (at least, 450 ok too),
cheap and reliable. Plug in an forget. Power and network are available
nearby.

Only issue I have is that the attic is used for storage only, hence open
to the elements (as in ventilation grills, etc), so can get very cold
and probably quite humid. I never had a problem with the above (it is a
sealed unit).

An suggestion for a replacement? I assume it will come with a power
supply and the case will not be sealed which worries me a bit.

TIA.

On 06/03/2019 12:53, JoeJoe wrote:
House is quite large, so had difficulties with Wi-Fi upstairs.

2-3 years ago I ran a Cat cable from the switch to the attic and put one
of these there, configured as an access point:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/TP-Link-TL-.../dp/B076ZX32BR

All worked well until a few days ago where I managed to bust it whilst
walking past...

Now looking for a better device: Dual band, 300 (at least, 450 ok too),
cheap and reliable. Plug in an forget.Â* Power and network are available
nearby.

Only issue I have is that the attic is used for storage only, hence open
to the elements (as in ventilation grills, etc), so can get very cold
and probably quite humid. I never had a problem with the above (it is a
sealed unit).

An suggestion for a replacement?Â* I assume it will come with a power
supply and the case will not be sealed which worries me a bit.

TIA.
dont worry about the envoirnment.

Get a cheap crappy router than no one wants off ebay/gumtree/carboot
sale and use that. You just turn off DHCP server anbd disable the
'connect via ADSL bit' and robert is a relative.



--
"If you dont read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

JoeJoe wrote:
Now looking for a better device: Dual band, 300 (at least, 450 ok too),
cheap and reliable. Plug in an forget. Power and network are available
nearby.

For the gold standard of pro-sumer kit, look at Ubiquiti
https://www.ui.com/products/#unifi

or Mikrotik:
https://mikrotik.com/products/group/...ome-and-office

They both have weatherproof versions. Ubiquiti is slightly more
'enterprise', expecting an additional server to run the controller software
(either a box they sell or a Java app you can run on a local machine). I
think the Mikrotik kit is more freestanding with a web interface.

They also support multiple APs, so you can just buy another if you don't
have coverage from one unit.

Many support PoE so you can mount it in the 'right' place and just run
ethernet to that point. They come with a PoE injector so you just need
power somewhere near the other end of the ethernet.

Not the cheapest, but good for a rock solid connection. I'd say it's night
and day over our previous Asus wifi router (which was itself a lot better
than our previous TP-Link).

Theo

On 07/03/2019 00:50, Theo wrote:
JoeJoe wrote:
Now looking for a better device: Dual band, 300 (at least, 450 ok too),
cheap and reliable. Plug in an forget. Power and network are available
nearby.

For the gold standard of pro-sumer kit, look at Ubiquiti
https://www.ui.com/products/#unifi

or Mikrotik:
https://mikrotik.com/products/group/...ome-and-office

They both have weatherproof versions. Ubiquiti is slightly more
'enterprise', expecting an additional server to run the controller software
(either a box they sell or a Java app you can run on a local machine). I
think the Mikrotik kit is more freestanding with a web interface.

Take the box is my advice - it's core and better it's not dependent on
the whims of a random PC or OS. I have one. It sits there and it works.
And it stays working.

I am *very* impressed with Ubiquity kit.

They also support multiple APs, so you can just buy another if you don't
have coverage from one unit.

Many support PoE so you can mount it in the 'right' place and just run
ethernet to that point. They come with a PoE injector so you just need
power somewhere near the other end of the ethernet.

Not the cheapest, but good for a rock solid connection. I'd say it's night
and day over our previous Asus wifi router (which was itself a lot better
than our previous TP-Link).

Theo



--
Email does not work

On 06/03/2019 22:35, JoeJoe wrote:
On 06/03/2019 16:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/03/2019 12:53, JoeJoe wrote:
House is quite large, so had difficulties with Wi-Fi upstairs.

2-3 years ago I ran a Cat cable from the switch to the attic and put
one of these there, configured as an access point:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/TP-Link-TL-.../dp/B076ZX32BR


All worked well until a few days ago where I managed to bust it
whilst walking past...

Now looking for a better device: Dual band, 300 (at least, 450 ok
too), cheap and reliable. Plug in an forget.Â* Power and network are
available nearby.

Only issue I have is that the attic is used for storage only, hence
open to the elements (as in ventilation grills, etc), so can get very
cold and probably quite humid. I never had a problem with the above
(it is a sealed unit).

An suggestion for a replacement?Â* I assume it will come with a power
supply and the case will not be sealed which worries me a bit.

TIA.
dont worry about the envoirnment.

Get a cheap crappy router than no one wants off ebay/gumtree/carboot
sale and use that. You just turn off DHCP server anbd disable the
'connect via ADSL bit' and robert is a relative.

Thanks for that - I think I may even have a spare one somewhere. I may
need to come back for more info regarding setup.


Thanks again.

Managed to find the spare modem/router (in fact I had two...).

Disabled DHCP server, set the SSID, password, and IP address, and
everything seems to be working just fine!

A couple more questions:

1. I noticed that you also mentioned "disable the 'connect via ADSL
bit'". Would you mind elaborating please?

2. Wifi speed from the main modem/router is around 27Mbps, which is the
speed of my line. The modem router is wired to a switch from which all
the other wired devices are connected (PCs, TVs, etc). I connected the
"new" access point to a spare socket on the main modem/router (i.e. not
through the switch), but the wifi speed when connecting to it was only
appox half that (12-14Mbps). Any idea why?

On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 14:01:16 +0000, JoeJoe wrote:

Disabled DHCP server, set the SSID, password, and IP address, and
everything seems to be working just fine!

A couple more questions:

1. I noticed that you also mentioned "disable the 'connect via ADSL
bit'". Would you mind elaborating please?

Provided the connection from your LAN goes into a LAN port on the
replacement access point and this accesss point is configured as a
DHCP client to get information from the main modem/router LAN that
effectively does it.

2. Wifi speed from the main modem/router is around 27Mbps, which is the
speed of my line. The modem router is wired to a switch from which all
the other wired devices are connected (PCs, TVs, etc). I connected the
"new" access point to a spare socket on the main modem/router (i.e. not
through the switch), but the wifi speed when connecting to it was only
appox half that (12-14Mbps). Any idea why?

What wireless standards does the replacement access point support.
Are the main modem router and the replacement access point on the
same or different channels? Note of the dozen or so available in the
2.4 GHz band only three don't mutually interfere with each other.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 08/03/2019 10:07, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 14:01:16 +0000, JoeJoe wrote:

Disabled DHCP server, set the SSID, password, and IP address, and
everything seems to be working just fine!

A couple more questions:

1. I noticed that you also mentioned "disable the 'connect via ADSL
bit'". Would you mind elaborating please?

Provided the connection from your LAN goes into a LAN port on the
replacement access point and this accesss point is configured as a
DHCP client to get information from the main modem/router LAN that
effectively does it.

Thanks, must be the case here.


2. Wifi speed from the main modem/router is around 27Mbps, which is the
speed of my line. The modem router is wired to a switch from which all
the other wired devices are connected (PCs, TVs, etc). I connected the
"new" access point to a spare socket on the main modem/router (i.e. not
through the switch), but the wifi speed when connecting to it was only
appox half that (12-14Mbps). Any idea why?

What wireless standards does the replacement access point support.
Are the main modem router and the replacement access point on the
same or different channels? Note of the dozen or so available in the
2.4 GHz band only three don't mutually interfere with each other.

The old modem that I set up as an AP is this one:
http://cache-www.belkin.com/support/...-4a_en_man.pdf

I believe that it supports 802.11b, g & n (see p. 43 of the above).
I set the channels manually: modem/router to channel 3 and AP to channel
9, the same setup I used with the TP-Link one which worked fine under
this setup (full broadband speed). I obviously disconnected it for the
purpose of the test.

On Sat, 9 Mar 2019 00:53:42 +0000, JoeJoe wrote:

I set the channels manually: modem/router to channel 3 and AP to channel
9, the same setup I used with the TP-Link one which worked fine under
this setup (full broadband speed).

I thought the non overlapping channels where 3, 6 and 11. Also be
aware that some of the modulation methods for the higher link speeds
use double the bandwith. So if such a unit is nominally on Ch:3 it'll
also be using Ch:6...

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Monday, 11 March 2019 10:06:39 UTC, Dave Liquorice wrote:
I thought the non overlapping channels where 3, 6 and 11. Also be
aware that some of the modulation methods for the higher link speeds
use double the bandwith. So if such a unit is nominally on Ch:3 it'll
also be using Ch:6...

Channel 1 is more separated from 6 than channel 3, so there should
be less overlap. Similarly, channel 13 is available in the UK and has
a wider separation from 6 than channel 11.

However, to get a really clear channel, use the 5GHz band and pick one
of the DFS channels as they are never set as defaults by the
manufacturers.

John

On 11/03/2019 10:28, wrote:
On Monday, 11 March 2019 10:06:39 UTC, Dave Liquorice wrote:
I thought the non overlapping channels where 3, 6 and 11. Also be
aware that some of the modulation methods for the higher link speeds
use double the bandwith. So if such a unit is nominally on Ch:3 it'll
also be using Ch:6...

Channel 1 is more separated from 6 than channel 3, so there should
be less overlap. Similarly, channel 13 is available in the UK and has
a wider separation from 6 than channel 11.

However, to get a really clear channel, use the 5GHz band and pick one
of the DFS channels as they are never set as defaults by the
manufacturers.

John

Thanks both - makes sense. I'll play with the channel numbers to see if
it makes a difference.

Unfortunately no 5GHz with this oldish router...