I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never really
challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in close
proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more walls,
there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router because of
the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no go), upstairs is
particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's because we have a lot of
flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****?
Shall I knuckle down and run cable (would be a ballache) or persevere
resiting the router and PCs and trying different channels?
(Which I have done today and it's currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

On 08/09/2020 11:37, R D S wrote:
I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never really
challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in close
proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more walls,
there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router because of
the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no go), upstairs is
particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's because we have a lot of
flourescent lighting.

It might be that or the actual fabric of the building containing RF
shielding that attenuating the signal. You can get various apps to show
you what the local WiFi signal environment is like.

All other things being equal the 2.7G band is more penetrating but also
more congested whereas the 5G band is faster less often used but less
able to get through small gaps in a relatively well screened room.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****?

It doesn't get on with metal screened rooms, foil covered insulation or
chicken mesh. Anything that blocks RF in fact.

Shall I knuckle down and run cable (would be a ballache) or persevere
resiting the router and PCs and trying different channels?
(Which I have done today and it's currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

Your simplest quick fix is to use powerline internet to bridge between
the router and the otherwise inaccessible zone. This assumes that you
have a single ring main and annoys radio hams a bit but will work quite
well to get you a decent speed connection without new wiring.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On 08/09/2020 12:01, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Tue, 08 Sep 2020 11:47:38 +0100, Martin Brown wrote:

Your simplest quick fix is to use powerline internet to bridge between
the router and the otherwise inaccessible zone. This assumes that you
have a single ring main and annoys radio hams a bit but will work quite
well to get you a decent speed connection without new wiring.

You can add that to "unreliable" too.

Every so often, for no apparent reason (and I've swapped units, so it's
unlikely to be a one-off) my PL adapters just "unsync" and need a power
cycle to restart. (I guess you can power cycle remotely if you have the
setup).

They are good enough for most commercial purposes. I certainly would not
want them in anything that was safety or mission critical. Mine go
haywire much less frequently than the ADSL link that they are serving.

One time they somehow lost their network name pairing. I had to connect
into them using the PL software (TIP: If you're using PL adapters, make
sure you have a Windows machine you can connect them into via Ethernet)
and reset the network name for both.

As I said befo I wouldn't trust my life to them ....

I have found powerline adapters surprisingly reliable and that they will
work OK across some chunks of ring main that are not even on the same
mains distribution board. it is pot luck if it works like that though.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

I have found powerline adapters surprisingly reliable and that they will
work OK across some chunks of ring main that are not even on the same
mains distribution board. it is pot luck if it works like that though.

nnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooo

R D S wrote:
So, is WiFi just a bit ****?
Shall I knuckle down and run cable (would be a ballache) or persevere
resiting the router and PCs and trying different channels?
(Which I have done today and it's currently usable)

Wifi is a technology that can range from working almost better than a wire to just
awful. It very much depends on the equipment you have, the RF environment,
and how it's configured. Wifi isn't ****, badly installed or configured
systems are. If you have an installation that is in any way challenging (ie
not the usual suburban house) then that's where it needs to be set up
properly.

Get a wifi analyser app on your phone and read guides like this one:
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020...int-placement/

and you can likely make things better. You may need to upgrade your kit
though, especially if you're trying to cover a large area with a single node.

Running cable is a solution, but what I'd look at is running cable to
additional access points to cover dead spots. That means you need many
fewer cables. Mesh is like using radio spectrum for the backhaul instead of
running that cable - less work, but that's spectrum your clients (or next
door) could be using.

Theo

On 08/09/2020 11:37, R D S wrote:

I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never really
challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in close
proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more walls,
there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router because of
the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no go), upstairs is
particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's because we have a lot of
flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****?

It can work well - but frequently people have unrealistic expectations,
and conclude that its just a bit ****!

If you stick just one router / wifi access point somewhere in a building
and hope to get coverage everywhere with fast transmission speeds etc,
then you are probably in for a disappointment.

Shall I knuckle down and run cable (would be a ballache) or persevere
resiting the router and PCs and trying different channels?
(Which I have done today and it's currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

In many cases you need to move toward more "enterprise" type solutions
to get ubiquitous and reliable wifi. That normally means multiple access
points to bathe all the required areas in the building with adequate signal.

In the past that ideally meant a router and then one or more additional
dedicated wifi access points. All configured up with the same network
SSID and password etc, and *cabled* back to the main router. (or
possibly homeplug linked back to the router).

These days there are other options with meshing units. These do multi
link wifi meshing where each access point (AP) talks to possibly several
others, and they form a resilient network, that optimises paths
dynamically. Some of the kit also integrates homeplug networking and
brings that into the mix where it can. So you can roll out multi AP
coverage without hardwiring.

(I would skip over the wifi repeater / range extender devices since they
only work well in limited circumstances)

What are your actual requirements? (i.e. what areas need coverage - what
applications are you running over wifi)



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 11:37:27 UTC+1, R D S wrote:
I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never really
challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in close
proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more walls,
there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router because of
the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no go), upstairs is
particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's because we have a lot of
flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****?
Shall I knuckle down and run cable (would be a ballache) or persevere
resiting the router and PCs and trying different channels?
(Which I have done today and it's currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

I find wifi wonderful.

At this moment, I am using wifi on a laptop, connected to a wifi range extender, which connects via wifi to another wifi range extender which is wired into an outdoor wifi connector which connects across quite a few metres into another similar device. Speed is fine. Reliability is fine. Once a week the bin lorry comes and parks right between the two outdoor devices and gets in the way for a few minutes.

There is another laptop, a desktop, tablets and phones all currently connected to the two range extenders using wifi.

A few things. The buildings here are all well insulated with Celotex (or similar). Hence, most wifi signals do not get out of the buildings very well. Usually I would expect to see dozens of wifi options but I usually only see two other than my own.

The range extender I am directly connected to is a cheap one from Lidl last week. Might still have some. Can be setup in various configurations. (I got it so that I could plug a television in somewhere as the TV has not itself got wifi.) The one upstairs is a four-year-old TP-Link one. Both handle 2..4 and 5 GHz.

I'd get at least one range extender. You can use one cable to plug that into your router, or make it use wifi.

I've used wifi in all sorts of weird and wonderful places from factories to offices, under power lines, in areas with lots of microwaves, fluorescents, heavy electrical kit, lots of other users. In general, it has worked better than most of us would ever have expected.

On 08/09/2020 13:37, polygonum_on_google wrote:
On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 11:37:27 UTC+1, R D S wrote:
I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never
really challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in
close proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more
walls, there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router
because of the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no
go), upstairs is particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's
because we have a lot of flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****? Shall I knuckle down and run cable
(would be a ballache) or persevere resiting the router and PCs and
trying different channels? (Which I have done today and it's
currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

I find wifi wonderful.

[snip]
The range extender I am directly connected to is a cheap one from
Lidl last week. Might still have some. Can be setup in various
configurations. (I got it so that I could plug a television in
somewhere as the TV has not itself got wifi.) The one upstairs is a
four-year-old TP-Link one. Both handle 2.4 and 5 GHz.

I'd get at least one range extender. You can use one cable to plug
that into your router, or make it use wifi.

The only thing to watch out for with range extenders is that the basic
plug and play ones essentially halve your peak end to end speed. This
can be an issue if you want to cast something like video a streamed
video wirelessly from your laptop or phone to a smart TV. These issues
tended to show up when everyone and their dog was using Zoom or Teams.

And they are something of a PITA to setup to do wired to be a Wifi node
since once configured you can no longer access the config page again on
some short of a factory reset followed by a full reconfiguration.

I've used wifi in all sorts of weird and wonderful places from
factories to offices, under power lines, in areas with lots of
microwaves, fluorescents, heavy electrical kit, lots of other users.
In general, it has worked better than most of us would ever have
expected.

I have seen some issues where Apple kit has very specific Wifi chipsets
that they refuse to work with reliably. It sort of works OK until it
doesn't and then one or more pieces need a reboot from scratch.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On 08/09/2020 11:37, R D S wrote:
I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never really
challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in close
proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more walls,
there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router because of
the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no go), upstairs is
particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's because we have a lot of
flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****?
Shall I knuckle down and run cable (would be a ballache) or persevere
resiting the router and PCs and trying different channels?
(Which I have done today and it's currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

There are many organisations (private and public sector) that are using
WiFi reliably in some very large multi-floor offices, factories and
warehouses. These only work reliably because a lot of time and effort
has gone into designing and implementing them. Most of these locations
will also have fluorescent lighting. Of course, there won't be just one
WiFi access point - there will be lots of them. If they are running
Voice over IP over WiFi, there will be even more.

There are also many organisations that are using WiFi unreliably -
usually because they have not designed and implemented them very well.

A router with a built in WiFi access point has many limitations.
Notably, the area it will cover and the number of devices that can
connect to it. You probably need multiple access points throughout your
building to reliably cover the areas you need to cover. You might get
away with just adding a second wired access point elsewhere in the
building, especially if things don't move around. If things do move
around, be careful that they don't attach to the first access point they
see and stay attached to it even when they roam to the other end of the
building. You might need many more access points to cover the building.

At home, I use WiFi for most things but my desktop PC, NAS and media
streamer are wired. My work laptop and my wife's work laptop generally
use WiFi but there is also a cable available for quick and easy wired
connectivity (but not quite as quick and easy as using WiFi) should the
need arise.

In the office I work in we use wired connections for users' laptops.
WiFi is available but it's only used for guest access, mobile and
add-hoc device connections.

WiFi can definitely provide reliable service but you can't beat hard
wired Ethernet. It's always going to provide "better" (although I'm not
going to define "better") service. I don't have any experience of what I
would call "critical" devices using WiFi but I understand that even some
life support type equipment does use WiFi. I'm guessing that if it loses
its network connection it continues to work though.

In article ,
R D S wrote:
I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never really
challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in close
proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more walls,
there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router because of
the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no go), upstairs is
particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's because we have a lot of
flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****?
Shall I knuckle down and run cable (would be a ballache) or persevere
resiting the router and PCs and trying different channels?
(Which I have done today and it's currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

I'd ask if in a workplace there is the same need for cordless as at home?
After all, even a decent laptop won't run all day on batteries.

--
*I did a theatrical performance about puns. It was a play on words.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 14:02:45 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
On 08/09/2020 13:37, polygonum_on_google wrote:
On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 11:37:27 UTC+1, R D S wrote:
I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never
really challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in
close proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more
walls, there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router
because of the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no
go), upstairs is particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's
because we have a lot of flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****? Shall I knuckle down and run cable
(would be a ballache) or persevere resiting the router and PCs and
trying different channels? (Which I have done today and it's
currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

I find wifi wonderful.

[snip]
The range extender I am directly connected to is a cheap one from
Lidl last week. Might still have some. Can be setup in various
configurations. (I got it so that I could plug a television in
somewhere as the TV has not itself got wifi.) The one upstairs is a
four-year-old TP-Link one. Both handle 2.4 and 5 GHz.

I'd get at least one range extender. You can use one cable to plug
that into your router, or make it use wifi.

The only thing to watch out for with range extenders is that the basic
plug and play ones essentially halve your peak end to end speed. This
can be an issue if you want to cast something like video a streamed
video wirelessly from your laptop or phone to a smart TV. These issues
tended to show up when everyone and their dog was using Zoom or Teams.

And they are something of a PITA to setup to do wired to be a Wifi node
since once configured you can no longer access the config page again on
some short of a factory reset followed by a full reconfiguration.

I've used wifi in all sorts of weird and wonderful places from
factories to offices, under power lines, in areas with lots of
microwaves, fluorescents, heavy electrical kit, lots of other users.
In general, it has worked better than most of us would ever have
expected.

I have seen some issues where Apple kit has very specific Wifi chipsets
that they refuse to work with reliably. It sort of works OK until it
doesn't and then one or more pieces need a reboot from scratch.



One of the laptops and two of the phones I referred to are Apple devices. And, in another location, there are a further four Apple devices. Not ever seen any issues specific to Apple devices. Of course, my limited experience doesn't mean there are no such issues, just I have not had them.

Yes, the range extenders do limit maximum bandwidth. But I really don't notice any feeling of slowness.

Yes, some range extenders can be a pain to configure. But every one I use has been easy enough to reconfigure in a few minutes with a cable and a laptop or desktop.

Buying a single range extender such as the Lidl one (just under £20), would be a good first step. Try it in multiple locations (use a long extension lead and you can move it around easily) and see how well it works. Maybe it would actually demonstrate the need for more than one. If the main router is 2.4 GHz only, it might help by allowing use of 5 GHz.

If something fancier is required, it wouldn't be that awful to have to give away or flog the range extender. And future decisions would be based on something approaching real world experience.

We use another range extender in the other location for a printer - which is itself wired only. I can print through three range extenders, two outdoor wifi devices, and a router, and I don't even notice any more of a delay than if I plugged straight into the USB port of the printer.

I rather assumed that R D S' needs would be towards the modest end of the scale. Maybe I am wrong?

On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 14:13:34 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
R D S wrote:
I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never really
challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in close
proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more walls,
there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router because of
the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no go), upstairs is
particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's because we have a lot of
flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****?
Shall I knuckle down and run cable (would be a ballache) or persevere
resiting the router and PCs and trying different channels?
(Which I have done today and it's currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

I'd ask if in a workplace there is the same need for cordless as at home?
After all, even a decent laptop won't run all day on batteries.

My experience has been that whatever wired options were installed, someone would want to locate their computer or printer (or whatever else) such that there was no easy way of safely running a network cable. Hence, even in otherwise extensively wired offices, there has often been quite a bit of wifi in use as well.

AP wrote:
A router with a built in WiFi access point has many limitations.
Notably, the area it will cover and the number of devices that can
connect to it. You probably need multiple access points throughout your
building to reliably cover the areas you need to cover. You might get
away with just adding a second wired access point elsewhere in the
building, especially if things don't move around. If things do move
around, be careful that they don't attach to the first access point they
see and stay attached to it even when they roam to the other end of the
building. You might need many more access points to cover the building.

The 'free' routers supplied by ISPs are often rubbish - some cost about $20
to make. They're good enough to get the service working, but if you want
decent coverage look at disabling wifi on the ISP's router and adding your
own access points. If they're all from the same vendor there may be a
configuration tool to coordinate them, prevent channel clashes, etc. I've
used Ubiquiti but other vendors also do this.

WiFi can definitely provide reliable service but you can't beat hard
wired Ethernet. It's always going to provide "better" (although I'm not
going to define "better") service. I don't have any experience of what I
would call "critical" devices using WiFi but I understand that even some
life support type equipment does use WiFi. I'm guessing that if it loses
its network connection it continues to work though.

If the device is big enough and static enough, agreed. Although there is
merit in being able to configure a device without having to cable it,
especially if you want to put it somewhere there isn't ethernet within easy
reach.

I'm sure lift support equipment is just using wifi for management,
configuration and maybe telemetry download - we don't have pacemakers
querying a remote server to decide whether to pulse the heart.

Theo

On 8 Sep 2020 at 14:34:15 BST, "polygonum_on_google"
wrote:

On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 14:13:34 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
R D S wrote:
I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never really
challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in close
proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more walls,
there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router because of
the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no go), upstairs is
particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's because we have a lot of
flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****?
Shall I knuckle down and run cable (would be a ballache) or persevere
resiting the router and PCs and trying different channels?
(Which I have done today and it's currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

I'd ask if in a workplace there is the same need for cordless as at home?
After all, even a decent laptop won't run all day on batteries.

My experience has been that whatever wired options were installed, someone
would want to locate their computer or printer (or whatever else) such that
there was no easy way of safely running a network cable. Hence, even in
otherwise extensively wired offices, there has often been quite a bit of wifi
in use as well.

Mainly phones and tablets IME of work. It also seems to have something to do
with the correct IP address to access the intranet - so mobile data might not
cut it.

--
Cheers, Rob

On 08/09/2020 13:21, John Rumm wrote:

What are your actual requirements? (i.e. what areas need coverage - what
applications are you running over wifi)



2 PCs & 2 printers upstairs and a laptop in an office at the rear of the
building.
Everything else is plugged in.

The laptop in the office, fair enough, it is close to a wall as is the
router but on the other side such that the signal would be travelling
through the length of the wall, and there's a metal gate, i'll let that
one off and I have run a cable.

One of the PCs upstairs is grand, the other is a nightmare, despite
being only about 5m from the router albeit with a brick wall and a
ceiling between, and a bunch of flourescents dotted about.
There may well be foam backed boards on the ceiling too.
It will work adequately on one side of the room, not at all on the other.

On 08/09/2020 13:18, Theo wrote:
R D S wrote:
So, is WiFi just a bit ****?
Shall I knuckle down and run cable (would be a ballache) or persevere
resiting the router and PCs and trying different channels?
(Which I have done today and it's currently usable)

Wifi is a technology that can range from working almost better than a wire to just
awful. It very much depends on the equipment you have, the RF environment,
and how it's configured. Wifi isn't ****,

It is. Its insecure and too dependent on a host of other factors
It is, however, marginally better than nothing


Running cable is a solution, but what I'd look at is running cable to
additional access points to cover dead spots. That means you need many
fewer cables. Mesh is like using radio spectrum for the backhaul instead of
running that cable - less work, but that's spectrum your clients (or next
door) could be using.

Run cables for every static device.
You know it makes more sense

Theo



--
"I am inclined to tell the truth and dislike people who lie consistently.
This makes me unfit for the company of people of a Left persuasion, and
all women"

On 08/09/2020 14:59, R D S wrote:
On 08/09/2020 13:21, John Rumm wrote:

What are your actual requirements? (i.e. what areas need coverage -
what applications are you running over wifi)



2 PCs & 2 printers upstairs and a laptop in an office at the rear of the
building.
Everything else is plugged in.

The laptop in the office, fair enough, it is close to a wall as is the
router but on the other side such that the signal would be travelling
through the length of the wall, and there's a metal gate, i'll let that
one off and I have run a cable.

One of the PCs upstairs is grand, the other is a nightmare, despite
being only about 5m from the router albeit with a brick wall and a
ceiling between, and a bunch of flourescents dotted about.
There may well be foam backed boards on the ceiling too.

Its the foil over the foam that usually causes grief (same goes for foil
backed plasterboard).

It will work adequately on one side of the room, not at all on the other.

I was thinking in terms of applications and users more than devices.

So for example wifi that is just about good enough for a bit of email
access and web browsing, may not cope with streaming video etc - so you
need to keep in mind the likely usage when deciding how far to push the
boat out.

If you are sharing wifi with customers, then you need a way of
partitioning it such that the guest wifi can't see any other wifi or
wired clients - and just has (possibly rate limited) internet access.

If sharing wifi with staff - then you need to consider security when
people leave employment. In a small office, you can probably just change
the wifi password and update everything that uses it. However that does
not scale well - so more sophisticated solutions may be needed if you
need per user authentication (or authentication shared over multiple
sites) etc.

In this case I am guessing its a very small number of users, and no
guest wifi? If so, then chances are one additional access point upstairs
will do the trick. If you can get a reliable homeplug connection between
floors, then there are off the shelf solutions that will do the mains
link, and also provide the supplementary access point.

A kit like :

https://www.tp-link.com/uk/home-netw...l-wpa4220-kit/

(available in two and three device packs)

will give you a couple of ethernet ports at a location remote from the
router, and also a wifi AP at the remote location.

If you want to dip your toe into the meshing arena, then the DECO kit is
good, and very easy to setup if you have a smart phone:

https://www.tp-link.com/uk/home-networking/deco/





--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 14:02 8 Sep 2020, Martin Brown said:
On 08/09/2020 13:37, polygonum_on_google wrote:
On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 11:37:27 UTC+1, R D S wrote:


I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never
really challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in
close proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more
walls, there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router
because of the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no
go), upstairs is particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's
because we have a lot of flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****? Shall I knuckle down and run cable
(would be a ballache) or persevere resiting the router and PCs and
trying different channels? (Which I have done today and it's
currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

I find wifi wonderful.

[snip]
The range extender I am directly connected to is a cheap one from
Lidl last week. Might still have some. Can be setup in various
configurations. (I got it so that I could plug a television in
somewhere as the TV has not itself got wifi.) The one upstairs is a
four-year-old TP-Link one. Both handle 2.4 and 5 GHz.

I'd get at least one range extender. You can use one cable to plug
that into your router, or make it use wifi.

The only thing to watch out for with range extenders is that the basic
plug and play ones essentially halve your peak end to end speed. This
can be an issue if you want to cast something like video a streamed
video wirelessly from your laptop or phone to a smart TV. These issues
tended to show up when everyone and their dog was using Zoom or Teams.

Does a mesh network of (two) routers have the same problem?

And they are something of a PITA to setup to do wired to be a Wifi node
since once configured you can no longer access the config page again on
some short of a factory reset followed by a full reconfiguration.

On 08/09/2020 18:36, Pamela wrote:
On 14:02 8 Sep 2020, Martin Brown said:
On 08/09/2020 13:37, polygonum_on_google wrote:
On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 11:37:27 UTC+1, R D S wrote:


I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never
really challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in
close proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more
walls, there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router
because of the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no
go), upstairs is particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's
because we have a lot of flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****? Shall I knuckle down and run cable
(would be a ballache) or persevere resiting the router and PCs and
trying different channels? (Which I have done today and it's
currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

I find wifi wonderful.

[snip]
The range extender I am directly connected to is a cheap one from
Lidl last week. Might still have some. Can be setup in various
configurations. (I got it so that I could plug a television in
somewhere as the TV has not itself got wifi.) The one upstairs is a
four-year-old TP-Link one. Both handle 2.4 and 5 GHz.

I'd get at least one range extender. You can use one cable to plug
that into your router, or make it use wifi.

The only thing to watch out for with range extenders is that the basic
plug and play ones essentially halve your peak end to end speed. This
can be an issue if you want to cast something like video a streamed
video wirelessly from your laptop or phone to a smart TV. These issues
tended to show up when everyone and their dog was using Zoom or Teams.

Does a mesh network of (two) routers have the same problem?

No, decent mesh kit usually has mimo with multiple radios in each unit,
so it can transmit to several clients clients and on the backhaul
connections to other mesh devices at the same time.

It may also support beam forming to allow directional targetting of
devices, which again can free spectrum in some directions as well as
optimise bandwidth use and use lower transmit power.

(dual band kit may also have band steering as well which will push
capable clients up onto 5GHz where its supported and advantageous - so
that frees up 2.4GHz capacity)



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 19:57 8 Sep 2020, John Rumm said:

On 08/09/2020 18:36, Pamela wrote:
On 14:02 8 Sep 2020, Martin Brown said:
On 08/09/2020 13:37, polygonum_on_google wrote:
On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 11:37:27 UTC+1, R D S wrote:


I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never
really challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in
close proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more
walls, there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router
because of the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no
go), upstairs is particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's
because we have a lot of flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****? Shall I knuckle down and run cable
(would be a ballache) or persevere resiting the router and PCs and
trying different channels? (Which I have done today and it's
currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

I find wifi wonderful.

[snip] The range extender I am directly connected to is a cheap one
from Lidl last week. Might still have some. Can be setup in various
configurations. (I got it so that I could plug a television in
somewhere as the TV has not itself got wifi.) The one upstairs is a
four-year-old TP-Link one. Both handle 2.4 and 5 GHz.

I'd get at least one range extender. You can use one cable to plug
that into your router, or make it use wifi.

The only thing to watch out for with range extenders is that the basic
plug and play ones essentially halve your peak end to end speed. This
can be an issue if you want to cast something like video a streamed
video wirelessly from your laptop or phone to a smart TV. These issues
tended to show up when everyone and their dog was using Zoom or Teams.

Does a mesh network of (two) routers have the same problem?

No, decent mesh kit usually has mimo with multiple radios in each unit,
so it can transmit to several clients clients and on the backhaul
connections to other mesh devices at the same time.

It may also support beam forming to allow directional targetting of
devices, which again can free spectrum in some directions as well as
optimise bandwidth use and use lower transmit power.

(dual band kit may also have band steering as well which will push
capable clients up onto 5GHz where its supported and advantageous - so
that frees up 2.4GHz capacity)

I have several Sonos speakers throughout the house configured to use their
own mesh network and (although I think Sonos is vastly overrated) their
performance is rock solid even in far-off rooms.

If mesh routers are anything like that then they would be quite
impressive.

R D S wrote:
I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never really
challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in close
proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more walls,
there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router because of
the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no go), upstairs is
particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's because we have a lot of
flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****?
Shall I knuckle down and run cable (would be a ballache) or persevere
resiting the router and PCs and trying different channels?
(Which I have done today and it's currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

You could do a mesh setup.

While parts of this article are silly marketing, the ability for
Wifi box nodes to store and forward can be useful.

https://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wire...system-secrets

The notion of using 5GHz for backhaul is a bit daft,
as 5GHz doesn't travel well through the building.

But at least in the case of that product description, there's
a range checker that checks whether where the second mesh box
is sitting, it is in a good enough spot.

This is a tech for someone with money, because buying three
boxen adds up.

You could stop buying them, once you've got coverage.

More examples here. Items have a review page with tests.

https://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tool...fi-system/view

Paul

On 08/09/2020 20:15, Pamela wrote:
On 19:57 8 Sep 2020, John Rumm said:

On 08/09/2020 18:36, Pamela wrote:
On 14:02 8 Sep 2020, Martin Brown said:
On 08/09/2020 13:37, polygonum_on_google wrote:
On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 11:37:27 UTC+1, R D S wrote:


I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never
really challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in
close proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more
walls, there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router
because of the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no
go), upstairs is particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's
because we have a lot of flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****? Shall I knuckle down and run cable
(would be a ballache) or persevere resiting the router and PCs and
trying different channels? (Which I have done today and it's
currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

I find wifi wonderful.

[snip] The range extender I am directly connected to is a cheap one
from Lidl last week. Might still have some. Can be setup in various
configurations. (I got it so that I could plug a television in
somewhere as the TV has not itself got wifi.) The one upstairs is a
four-year-old TP-Link one. Both handle 2.4 and 5 GHz.

I'd get at least one range extender. You can use one cable to plug
that into your router, or make it use wifi.

The only thing to watch out for with range extenders is that the basic
plug and play ones essentially halve your peak end to end speed. This
can be an issue if you want to cast something like video a streamed
video wirelessly from your laptop or phone to a smart TV. These issues
tended to show up when everyone and their dog was using Zoom or Teams.

Does a mesh network of (two) routers have the same problem?

No, decent mesh kit usually has mimo with multiple radios in each unit,
so it can transmit to several clients clients and on the backhaul
connections to other mesh devices at the same time.

It may also support beam forming to allow directional targetting of
devices, which again can free spectrum in some directions as well as
optimise bandwidth use and use lower transmit power.

(dual band kit may also have band steering as well which will push
capable clients up onto 5GHz where its supported and advantageous - so
that frees up 2.4GHz capacity)

I have several Sonos speakers throughout the house configured to use their
own mesh network and (although I think Sonos is vastly overrated) their
performance is rock solid even in far-off rooms.

If mesh routers are anything like that then they would be quite
impressive.

I have only limited experience with them so far, but they do seem to do
what they are supposed to.

I have one client that wanted decent wifi at home - this is in a large
modern place spread over three floors. Normal wifi with just one router
was no use. So originally we went for a system with wifi on the router
in the office downstairs to provide coverage there, then homeplug links
to access points on the other two storeys. (this was using all Draytek
kit - so not your typical home wifi). That worked well until the start
of lockdown, and much heavier use was being made of wifi with more
people at home streaming video, plus no doubt neighbours doing the same.
Plus he wanted to wifi an outbuilding. So it was time to shift gear on
the implementation.

In the end I deployed TP Link Deco P9 units (these are hybrid mesh wifi
/ homeplug units) In the end using a total of 6 devices (probably
overkil, 4 would have done but they come in three packs!) That seems to
have coped with everything asked of it, and it was simple enough I could
even get the (really non techie!) client to set them up with his phone
with a bit of coaching)


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 14:59:44 UTC+1, RJH wrote:
On 8 Sep 2020 at 14:34:15 BST, "polygonum_on_google"
wrote:

On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 14:13:34 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
R D S wrote:
I've never had bother with WiFi in the past but then i've never really
challenged it. At home and prior workplace everything is in close
proximity.

At my current workplace it just doesn't work. But there are more walls,
there's a metal security gate between one PC and the router because of
the L shape of the building (seemingly a complete no go), upstairs is
particularly bad and i'm wondering if that's because we have a lot of
flourescent lighting.

So, is WiFi just a bit ****?
Shall I knuckle down and run cable (would be a ballache) or persevere
resiting the router and PCs and trying different channels?
(Which I have done today and it's currently usable)

I'm starting to think it's only suitable for domestic/non critical
applications.

I'd ask if in a workplace there is the same need for cordless as at home?
After all, even a decent laptop won't run all day on batteries.

My experience has been that whatever wired options were installed, someone
would want to locate their computer or printer (or whatever else) such that
there was no easy way of safely running a network cable. Hence, even in
otherwise extensively wired offices, there has often been quite a bit of wifi
in use as well.

Mainly phones and tablets IME of work. It also seems to have something to do
with the correct IP address to access the intranet - so mobile data might not
cut it.

DHCP is handled exclusively by the router. Several are static and it is set up with long expire times (a few days, IIRC).

Never even think about it these days. It just works.

I can see all the devices on the network - no problem - from anywhere.