Can I give two adjacent wifi access points, the same name and password?

On 05/10/2020 08:25, Harry Bloomfield wrote:

Can I give two adjacent wifi access points, the same name and password?

Yes...

In both senses - they can both use the same SSID and wifi password, and
can both have the same admin credentials for access to the configuration
pages.


--
Cheers,

John.

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

John Rumm expressed precisely :
Yes...

In both senses - they can both use the same SSID and wifi password, and can
both have the same admin credentials for access to the configuration pages.

Thanks, I think that means I can put an extra AP in my garage, to give
better access for some Smart Plugs out there, which presently have poor
access - with no need to change the SM's configuration.

I've never managed it, besides won't they have different addresses? Can you
not just use a Mesh system?
Brian

--
--
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
Harry Bloomfield; "Esq." wrote in message
...
Can I give two adjacent wifi access points, the same name and password?

Yes but I found that certain systems when logged into one of them, sees the
other one as the same name with ext on the end and won't auto connect to it.
If you name them differently then you can make both preferred networks, at
least that has been my experience.
Brian

--
--
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"John Rumm" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 05/10/2020 08:25, Harry Bloomfield wrote:

Can I give two adjacent wifi access points, the same name and password?

Yes...

In both senses - they can both use the same SSID and wifi password, and
can both have the same admin credentials for access to the configuration
pages.


--
Cheers,

John.

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

On 05/10/2020 08:47, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
John Rumm expressed precisely :
Yes...

In both senses - they can both use the same SSID and wifi password,
and can both have the same admin credentials for access to the
configuration pages.

Thanks, I think that means I can put an extra AP in my garage, to give
better access for some Smart Plugs out there, which presently have poor
access - with no need to change the SM's configuration.

Yup... with multiple APs setup with the same SSID and pw, clients can
"roam" between them.

However for devices that don't move they will normally stick to the one
with the stronger signal.

Note you may need disconnect from the current AP before they will
countenance trying the new one! Some clients seem determined to stick to
the AP they are connected to with a crap signal, even when there is a
much better option available.


--
Cheers,

John.

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

On 05/10/2020 08:58, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:

I've never managed it, besides won't they have different addresses?

While wifi access points may well have an ip address for access to their
configuration pages from a web browser, their actual wifi functionality
mostly happens down at layer 2, and so don't operate with IP addresses
at all. They are basically like a bridge or network switch, routing
packets based on mac addresses.

Can you
not just use a Mesh system?

If you have the right hardware, then that is also an option, but a
fairly new one. There are many multiple AP networks out there that are
not meshing.


--
Cheers,

John.

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

John Rumm wrote:
On 05/10/2020 08:47, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
John Rumm expressed precisely :
Yes...

In both senses - they can both use the same SSID and wifi password,
and can both have the same admin credentials for access to the
configuration pages.

Thanks, I think that means I can put an extra AP in my garage, to give
better access for some Smart Plugs out there, which presently have poor
access - with no need to change the SM's configuration.

Yup... with multiple APs setup with the same SSID and pw, clients can
"roam" between them.

However for devices that don't move they will normally stick to the one
with the stronger signal.

Note you may need disconnect from the current AP before they will
countenance trying the new one! Some clients seem determined to stick to
the AP they are connected to with a crap signal, even when there is a
much better option available.


That last point was why we changed to a mesh system. Our mobile devices
would all doggedly stick with the first AP they connected to rather than
roam to the one with the best signal. We were forever manually switching
them to the best AP.

Tim
--
Please don't feed the trolls

"Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" wrote:
I've never managed it, besides won't they have different addresses? Can you
not just use a Mesh system?

It's still mostly down to the client to move from one source to another.

If a WiFi server *forces* a client to disconnect and reconnect then
there is a significant delay, at least that's my understanding of
how it all works.

--
Chris Green
·

On 05/10/2020 09:33, Tim+ wrote:
John Rumm wrote:
On 05/10/2020 08:47, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
John Rumm expressed precisely :
Yes...

In both senses - they can both use the same SSID and wifi password,
and can both have the same admin credentials for access to the
configuration pages.

Thanks, I think that means I can put an extra AP in my garage, to give
better access for some Smart Plugs out there, which presently have poor
access - with no need to change the SM's configuration.

Yup... with multiple APs setup with the same SSID and pw, clients can
"roam" between them.

However for devices that don't move they will normally stick to the one
with the stronger signal.

Note you may need disconnect from the current AP before they will
countenance trying the new one! Some clients seem determined to stick to
the AP they are connected to with a crap signal, even when there is a
much better option available.


That last point was why we changed to a mesh system. Our mobile devices
would all doggedly stick with the first AP they connected to rather than
roam to the one with the best signal. We were forever manually switching
them to the best AP.

Tim

I don't seem to have that problem with a cheap TP-Link range extender,
or with a previous one (different make) that died. That's with about ten
mobile devices (phones, tablets, laptops) of different makes and all the
usual OSs.

On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 09:14:10 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

snip

However for devices that don't move they will normally stick to the one
with the stronger signal.

Assuming that AP was available when the client switched on (but you
covered that with your 'normally'). ;-)

Note you may need disconnect from the current AP before they will
countenance trying the new one!

Or that (and what often happens 'normally' when you power cycle /
unplug-move such devices in any case).

Some clients seem determined to stick to
the AP they are connected to with a crap signal, even when there is a
much better option available.

I can only remember seeing the option in the Windows clients where you
can change the connection order of the client to AP's. More handy for
mobile devices that regularly have access to a group of AP's but
generally are closer to one than the other(s) (like here).

I generally push my 'main' AP to the top of the list, other peoples
AP's (that I visit sometimes) further down and remove any that I know
are obsolete or were one-off's.

Cheers, T i m

On 05/10/2020 10:44, T i m wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 09:14:10 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

snip

However for devices that don't move they will normally stick to the one
with the stronger signal.

Assuming that AP was available when the client switched on (but you
covered that with your 'normally'). ;-)

Note you may need disconnect from the current AP before they will
countenance trying the new one!

Or that (and what often happens 'normally' when you power cycle /
unplug-move such devices in any case).

Some clients seem determined to stick to
the AP they are connected to with a crap signal, even when there is a
much better option available.

I can only remember seeing the option in the Windows clients where you
can change the connection order of the client to AP's. More handy for
mobile devices that regularly have access to a group of AP's but
generally are closer to one than the other(s) (like here).

I generally push my 'main' AP to the top of the list, other peoples
AP's (that I visit sometimes) further down and remove any that I know
are obsolete or were one-off's.

That makes sense when prioritising networks rather than individual APs,
since if you have given all the APs the same SSID, then they all look
like the same network.




--
Cheers,

John.

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

On 05/10/2020 09:33, Tim+ wrote:
John Rumm wrote:
On 05/10/2020 08:47, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
John Rumm expressed precisely :
Yes...

In both senses - they can both use the same SSID and wifi password,
and can both have the same admin credentials for access to the
configuration pages.

Thanks, I think that means I can put an extra AP in my garage, to give
better access for some Smart Plugs out there, which presently have poor
access - with no need to change the SM's configuration.

Yup... with multiple APs setup with the same SSID and pw, clients can
"roam" between them.

However for devices that don't move they will normally stick to the one
with the stronger signal.

Note you may need disconnect from the current AP before they will
countenance trying the new one! Some clients seem determined to stick to
the AP they are connected to with a crap signal, even when there is a
much better option available.


That last point was why we changed to a mesh system. Our mobile devices
would all doggedly stick with the first AP they connected to rather than
roam to the one with the best signal. We were forever manually switching
them to the best AP.

Some kit seems to do it better than others.

Also some APs allow you to set minimum signal quality and strength
levels, so that they will actually disassociate clients where the
connection is falling below them (this promoting the client to try to
reconnect - and hopefully to the better AP). To work really well the APs
need to talk to each other over the wired LAN so they can assess when
the client has better options (i.e. no point in kicking a client off, if
it can't get a better signal elsewhere)

For example:

https://www.draytek.co.uk/support/guides/kb-ap-mobility


--
Cheers,

John.

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

On 05/10/2020 09:42, Chris Green wrote:
"Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" wrote:
I've never managed it, besides won't they have different addresses? Can you
not just use a Mesh system?

It's still mostly down to the client to move from one source to another.

If a WiFi server *forces* a client to disconnect and reconnect then
there is a significant delay, at least that's my understanding of
how it all works.

There are various "fast roaming" capabilities that can help mitigate,
but yup there is a tradeoff, so you don't want to click clients too easily.

(The worst case is when using enterprise style EAP authentication rather
than WPA2 - since authentication not only requires the normal 4 way
handshake, but also a conversation with the RADIUS server as well)



--
Cheers,

John.

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

On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 11:14:36 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

snip

I generally push my 'main' AP to the top of the list, other peoples
AP's (that I visit sometimes) further down and remove any that I know
are obsolete or were one-off's.

That makes sense when prioritising networks rather than individual APs,
since if you have given all the APs the same SSID, then they all look
like the same network.

I don't give them the same credentials here because there are times I
want to use a specific AP ... and given it doesn't make any difference
re connectivity (unlike a mesh), I prefer it that way.

Cheers, T i m

In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Can I give two adjacent wifi access points, the same name and password?

Yes - I have that here. Main and range extender.

--
*Hang in there, retirement is only thirty years away! *

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

On 05/10/2020 09:33, Tim+ wrote:
John Rumm wrote:
On 05/10/2020 08:47, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
John Rumm expressed precisely :
Yes...

In both senses - they can both use the same SSID and wifi password,
and can both have the same admin credentials for access to the
configuration pages.

Thanks, I think that means I can put an extra AP in my garage, to give
better access for some Smart Plugs out there, which presently have poor
access - with no need to change the SM's configuration.

Yup... with multiple APs setup with the same SSID and pw, clients can
"roam" between them.

However for devices that don't move they will normally stick to the one
with the stronger signal.

Note you may need disconnect from the current AP before they will
countenance trying the new one! Some clients seem determined to stick to
the AP they are connected to with a crap signal, even when there is a
much better option available.


That last point was why we changed to a mesh system. Our mobile devices
would all doggedly stick with the first AP they connected to rather than
roam to the one with the best signal. We were forever manually switching
them to the best AP.

Tim

As switching APs is , I thought, initiated by the Client ( eg phone) how
does a Mesh system change things ?

On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 14:02:23 +0100, Robert
wrote:

snip

That last point was why we changed to a mesh system. Our mobile devices
would all doggedly stick with the first AP they connected to rather than
roam to the one with the best signal. We were forever manually switching
them to the best AP.


As switching APs is , I thought, initiated by the Client ( eg phone) how
does a Mesh system change things ?

Because (as I understand it), the Mesh (also) handles the connection
rather like a digital mobile network does, as opposed to how the old
analogue mobile network (and straight WiFi APs) did?

Because the Mesh devices are also talking to each other (unlike AP's),
they can determine which of them could best serve the client
connection and move that connection to the nearest / strongest signal.

Cheers, T i m

T i m wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 14:02:23 +0100, Robert
wrote:

snip

That last point was why we changed to a mesh system. Our mobile devices
would all doggedly stick with the first AP they connected to rather than
roam to the one with the best signal. We were forever manually switching
them to the best AP.


As switching APs is , I thought, initiated by the Client ( eg phone) how
does a Mesh system change things ?

Because (as I understand it), the Mesh (also) handles the connection
rather like a digital mobile network does, as opposed to how the old
analogue mobile network (and straight WiFi APs) did?

Because the Mesh devices are also talking to each other (unlike AP's),
they can determine which of them could best serve the client
connection and move that connection to the nearest / strongest signal.

But they can't really "move that connection to the nearest / strongest
signal", it's down to the client to do that. All the mesh system can
do is *encourage* the client to change.

There are new standards appearing for WiFi that make it easier and
quicker for this to happen but old clients won't get moved so easily.

--
Chris Green
·

On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 15:11:34 +0100, Chris Green wrote:

T i m wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 14:02:23 +0100, Robert
wrote:

snip

That last point was why we changed to a mesh system. Our mobile devices
would all doggedly stick with the first AP they connected to rather than
roam to the one with the best signal. We were forever manually switching
them to the best AP.


As switching APs is , I thought, initiated by the Client ( eg phone) how
does a Mesh system change things ?

Because (as I understand it), the Mesh (also) handles the connection
rather like a digital mobile network does, as opposed to how the old
analogue mobile network (and straight WiFi APs) did?

Because the Mesh devices are also talking to each other (unlike AP's),
they can determine which of them could best serve the client
connection and move that connection to the nearest / strongest signal.

But they can't really "move that connection to the nearest / strongest
signal", it's down to the client to do that. All the mesh system can
do is *encourage* the client to change.

Ah, ok, and when it does so does it do it seamlessly, unlike between
conventional AP's, maintaining any connections etc?

There are new standards appearing for WiFi that make it easier and
quicker for this to happen but old clients won't get moved so easily.

Ok, thanks Chris.

Cheers, T i m

On 05/10/2020 16:10, T i m wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 15:11:34 +0100, Chris Green wrote:

T i m wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 14:02:23 +0100, Robert
wrote:

snip

That last point was why we changed to a mesh system. Our mobile devices
would all doggedly stick with the first AP they connected to rather than
roam to the one with the best signal. We were forever manually switching
them to the best AP.


As switching APs is , I thought, initiated by the Client ( eg phone) how
does a Mesh system change things ?

Because (as I understand it), the Mesh (also) handles the connection
rather like a digital mobile network does, as opposed to how the old
analogue mobile network (and straight WiFi APs) did?

Because the Mesh devices are also talking to each other (unlike AP's),
they can determine which of them could best serve the client
connection and move that connection to the nearest / strongest signal.

But they can't really "move that connection to the nearest / strongest
signal", it's down to the client to do that. All the mesh system can
do is *encourage* the client to change.

Ah, ok, and when it does so does it do it seamlessly, unlike between
conventional AP's, maintaining any connections etc?

There are new standards appearing for WiFi that make it easier and
quicker for this to happen but old clients won't get moved so easily.

Ok, thanks Chris.

Cheers, T i m

And in practice ( Android phone) does the connection move ?
I run 3 wifi networks in the house and switching is a pain at times. Was
wondering about MESH

On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 16:15:22 +0100, Robert
wrote:

snip

But they can't really "move that connection to the nearest / strongest
signal", it's down to the client to do that. All the mesh system can
do is *encourage* the client to change.

snip

And in practice ( Android phone) does the connection move ?

According to Chris, yes.

I run 3 wifi networks in the house and switching is a pain at times. Was
wondering about MESH

I think that's the point, not so much coverage (but I think that's
improved as well, over straight access points) but that if you are
moving about a lot, it makes that more predictable. I think John Rumm
has installed a Mesh system with a customer and the customer is happy?

Cheers, T i m

On 05/10/2020 16:59, T i m wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 16:15:22 +0100, Robert
wrote:

snip

But they can't really "move that connection to the nearest / strongest
signal", it's down to the client to do that. All the mesh system can
do is *encourage* the client to change.

snip

And in practice ( Android phone) does the connection move ?

According to Chris, yes.

I run 3 wifi networks in the house and switching is a pain at times. Was
wondering about MESH

I think that's the point, not so much coverage (but I think that's
improved as well, over straight access points) but that if you are
moving about a lot, it makes that more predictable. I think John Rumm
has installed a Mesh system with a customer and the customer is happy?

So far yup.

I did another one the other day - although on a much smaller scale (two
APs). That was in a relatively small office where they could get good
wifi signal strength everywhere with just the single conventional AP in
the middle. What they could not get was anything close to decent data
throughput or relaiability. The are quite heavily surrounded by other
WLANS, and their existing kit (while decent) was 2.4GHz single band only.

So going mesh gave them all the modern toys like dual band with band
steering, dynamic routing to the best AP. 802.11ac with beam forming etc.

It made a dramatic difference, now the wifi clients can saturate the
FTTC broadband connection, whereas before they could not even manage 5 Mbps.


--
Cheers,

John.

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

On 5 Oct 2020 at 11:14:36 BST, "John Rumm"
wrote:

On 05/10/2020 10:44, T i m wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 09:14:10 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

snip

However for devices that don't move they will normally stick to the one
with the stronger signal.

Assuming that AP was available when the client switched on (but you
covered that with your 'normally'). ;-)

Note you may need disconnect from the current AP before they will
countenance trying the new one!

Or that (and what often happens 'normally' when you power cycle /
unplug-move such devices in any case).

Some clients seem determined to stick to
the AP they are connected to with a crap signal, even when there is a
much better option available.

I can only remember seeing the option in the Windows clients where you
can change the connection order of the client to AP's. More handy for
mobile devices that regularly have access to a group of AP's but
generally are closer to one than the other(s) (like here).

I generally push my 'main' AP to the top of the list, other peoples
AP's (that I visit sometimes) further down and remove any that I know
are obsolete or were one-off's.

That makes sense when prioritising networks rather than individual APs,
since if you have given all the APs the same SSID, then they all look
like the same network.

Presumably all the meshed APs need to share the same encryption secrets so
that the client can continue its connection seamlessly; transferring the data
stream back to the original AP would be very extravagant if they are radio
connected? Do you know if this happens?


--
Roger Hayter

On 05/10/2020 22:02, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 5 Oct 2020 at 11:14:36 BST, "John Rumm"
wrote:

On 05/10/2020 10:44, T i m wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 09:14:10 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

snip

However for devices that don't move they will normally stick to the one
with the stronger signal.

Assuming that AP was available when the client switched on (but you
covered that with your 'normally'). ;-)

Note you may need disconnect from the current AP before they will
countenance trying the new one!

Or that (and what often happens 'normally' when you power cycle /
unplug-move such devices in any case).

Some clients seem determined to stick to
the AP they are connected to with a crap signal, even when there is a
much better option available.

I can only remember seeing the option in the Windows clients where you
can change the connection order of the client to AP's. More handy for
mobile devices that regularly have access to a group of AP's but
generally are closer to one than the other(s) (like here).

I generally push my 'main' AP to the top of the list, other peoples
AP's (that I visit sometimes) further down and remove any that I know
are obsolete or were one-off's.

That makes sense when prioritising networks rather than individual APs,
since if you have given all the APs the same SSID, then they all look
like the same network.

Presumably all the meshed APs need to share the same encryption secrets so
that the client can continue its connection seamlessly; transferring the data
stream back to the original AP would be very extravagant if they are radio
connected? Do you know if this happens?

They do need to be configured with the same credentials (for at least
one network at least). The data stream does not need to go to the
original AP, although due to the dynamic routing of mesh systems its
possible that it could if that appeared to be the best option.
(especially if for example the original AP is the only one with a wired
connection to the main router).

Many of the mesh systems can only support WPA style shared secret
security rather than individual user based authentication systems like
EAP. (although some of the business class mesh systems do - they are
usually not able to interoperate with the "home" style platforms).


--
Cheers,

John.

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

In message , T i m
writes
I think John Rumm
has installed a Mesh system with a customer and the customer is happy?

Speaking as a very 'non techie', I recently installed a mesh system at
home. Installed means nothing more than plugging into the mains and
pushing pairing buttons.

We now have the main router on a half landing, plugged into the main
(and only) landline phone socket, together with two non hard wired
repeaters, one upstairs and the other downstairs.

This laptop is in the kitchen, opposite end of the house to the nearest
repeater, and fast.com reports my wi-fi speeds a few seconds ago as
74Mbps down and 17Mbps up, which is good enough for me. Installed a few
weeks ago, and seems rock steady. We have various devices around the
house (mobiles, laptops, iPads, mobiles (Apple and Android) and all just
connect and work.
--
Graeme

On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 09:33:10 +0100, Graeme
wrote:

In message , T i m
writes
I think John Rumm
has installed a Mesh system with a customer and the customer is happy?

Speaking as a very 'non techie', I recently installed a mesh system at
home. Installed means nothing more than plugging into the mains and
pushing pairing buttons.

We now have the main router on a half landing, plugged into the main
(and only) landline phone socket, together with two non hard wired
repeaters, one upstairs and the other downstairs.

This laptop is in the kitchen, opposite end of the house to the nearest
repeater, and fast.com reports my wi-fi speeds a few seconds ago as
74Mbps down and 17Mbps up, which is good enough for me. Installed a few
weeks ago, and seems rock steady. We have various devices around the
house (mobiles, laptops, iPads, mobiles (Apple and Android) and all just
connect and work.

Cool ... so did it present a different SSID (Network name), different
to the Router and did you reconnect everything to said new one?

Otherwise the router (non Mesh) would still be in the picture?

Cheers, T i m

In message , T i m
writes
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 09:33:10 +0100, Graeme
wrote:

This laptop is in the kitchen, opposite end of the house to the nearest
repeater, and fast.com reports my wi-fi speeds a few seconds ago as
74Mbps down and 17Mbps up, which is good enough for me. Installed a few
weeks ago, and seems rock steady. We have various devices around the
house (mobiles, laptops, iPads, mobiles (Apple and Android) and all just
connect and work.

Cool ... so did it present a different SSID (Network name), different
to the Router and did you reconnect everything to said new one?

Only one name appears on the list of 'Local Area Connections', and that
name is the same as it always has been, although that means it is not
possible to see whether a device is connected to the original router or
either of the repeaters. The mesh must be working though, as the signal
strength and speed is far better than in was, in areas that had a very
poor signal without the repeaters.

Another noticeable difference is the printer/scanner which was connected
wirelessly via a home plug, and was always a bit hit and miss. I did a
factory reset and attached the printer, via wi-fi, to the router address
(which I'm certain is actually one of the repeaters) and that too has
been rock solid. Only a cheap and cheerful Canon inkjet, but it works.

My (limited) understanding is that devices see the wi-fi network as just
one connection whether the signal is coming from any one of three signal
'broadcasters', and attach to the strongest signal, with the ability to
change source as devices are moved around that house. That is probably
a non techie over simplification, but it works.
--
Graeme

On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 11:20:46 +0100, Graeme
wrote:

In message , T i m
writes
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 09:33:10 +0100, Graeme
wrote:

This laptop is in the kitchen, opposite end of the house to the nearest
repeater, and fast.com reports my wi-fi speeds a few seconds ago as
74Mbps down and 17Mbps up, which is good enough for me. Installed a few
weeks ago, and seems rock steady. We have various devices around the
house (mobiles, laptops, iPads, mobiles (Apple and Android) and all just
connect and work.

Cool ... so did it present a different SSID (Network name), different
to the Router and did you reconnect everything to said new one?

Only one name appears on the list of 'Local Area Connections', and that
name is the same as it always has been,

Ok.

although that means it is not
possible to see whether a device is connected to the original router or
either of the repeaters.

Agreed.

The mesh must be working though, as the signal
strength and speed is far better than in was, in areas that had a very
poor signal without the repeaters.

Well, the signal strengths are likely to be better (extra kit) but not
that the 'Mesh' part was working fully (full movement around the
location without disconnection), or if the two new Mesh devices were
stronger signal than the router and so the router never provides a
connection itself?

Another noticeable difference is the printer/scanner which was connected
wirelessly via a home plug, and was always a bit hit and miss. I did a
factory reset and attached the printer, via wi-fi, to the router address
(which I'm certain is actually one of the repeaters) and that too has
been rock solid. Only a cheap and cheerful Canon inkjet, but it works.

Cool.

My (limited) understanding is that devices see the wi-fi network as just
one connection whether the signal is coming from any one of three signal
'broadcasters', and attach to the strongest signal,

Well, that would be nice but I'm not sure how a non-Mesh router could
play part of that, unless the Mesh system can take a connection off
the router seamlessly somehow?

I believe in the instance John oversaw they turned off the AP in the
router?

with the ability to
change source as devices are moved around that house.

Say the Mesh devices overlapped each other and both overwhelmed the AP
in the router, maybe the router never actually takes any connections?

That is probably
a non techie over simplification, but it works.

Well, that's the key but I would still be inclined to check to see if
the router AP might still need to be turned of for fear of it taking a
connection in some instances and then causing a mobile device to drop
as you move away from it and to a Mesh unit?

Cheers, T i m

Graeme wrote:
In message , T i m
writes
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 09:33:10 +0100, Graeme
wrote:

This laptop is in the kitchen, opposite end of the house to the nearest
repeater, and fast.com reports my wi-fi speeds a few seconds ago as
74Mbps down and 17Mbps up, which is good enough for me. Installed a few
weeks ago, and seems rock steady. We have various devices around the
house (mobiles, laptops, iPads, mobiles (Apple and Android) and all just
connect and work.

Cool ... so did it present a different SSID (Network name), different
to the Router and did you reconnect everything to said new one?

Only one name appears on the list of 'Local Area Connections', and that
name is the same as it always has been, although that means it is not
possible to see whether a device is connected to the original router or
either of the repeaters. The mesh must be working though, as the signal
strength and speed is far better than in was, in areas that had a very
poor signal without the repeaters.

But would a 'non mesh' system with the same number of access points be
just as good - that's the question.

--
Chris Green
·

On 06/10/2020 12:00, T i m wrote:


I believe in the instance John oversaw they turned off the AP in the
router?

With the right kit (and centralised management), it might be possible to
include a non mesh wifi into a mix as park of a backhaul for a mesh
system. (normally mesh systems expect one AP to be connected via
ethernet to the main router - that becomes the mesh "root".

(but in the case I described it was a layer of complexity not required
since he had an abundance of meshing APs).

--
Cheers,

John.

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

In message , Chris Green
writes
Graeme wrote:

Only one name appears on the list of 'Local Area Connections', and that
name is the same as it always has been, although that means it is not
possible to see whether a device is connected to the original router or
either of the repeaters. The mesh must be working though, as the signal
strength and speed is far better than in was, in areas that had a very
poor signal without the repeaters.

But would a 'non mesh' system with the same number of access points be
just as good - that's the question.

Within my limited knowledge of how these things work, the answer must be
yes, but with the proviso that only the mesh system seamlessly switches
devices from one source to another (i.e. always to the strongest signal)
without any user intervention. But I may have misunderstood.
--
Graeme

In message , T i m
writes

Well, that's the key but I would still be inclined to check to see if
the router AP might still need to be turned of for fear of it taking a
connection in some instances and then causing a mobile device to drop
as you move away from it and to a Mesh unit?

I don't think that is a current problem in this house, as we (self and
wife) tend to use laptops and iPad in one place, most of the time. The
real test will come when son next returns home as he uses his mobile all
the time, all over the place. That will be the acid test. At present,
it all works well for the two of us, and we're happy to leave well alone
unless or until we notice a problem.
--
Graeme

On 06/10/2020 12:06, Chris Green wrote:
Graeme wrote:
In message , T i m
writes
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 09:33:10 +0100, Graeme
wrote:

This laptop is in the kitchen, opposite end of the house to the nearest
repeater, and fast.com reports my wi-fi speeds a few seconds ago as
74Mbps down and 17Mbps up, which is good enough for me. Installed a few
weeks ago, and seems rock steady. We have various devices around the
house (mobiles, laptops, iPads, mobiles (Apple and Android) and all just
connect and work.

Cool ... so did it present a different SSID (Network name), different
to the Router and did you reconnect everything to said new one?

Only one name appears on the list of 'Local Area Connections', and that
name is the same as it always has been, although that means it is not
possible to see whether a device is connected to the original router or
either of the repeaters. The mesh must be working though, as the signal
strength and speed is far better than in was, in areas that had a very
poor signal without the repeaters.

But would a 'non mesh' system with the same number of access points be
just as good - that's the question.

They will have different capabilities... mesh gives you self healing,
and the ability to roll out a network with fewer (or no) cables.
Individual hardwired APs might give you more throughput with lots of
users. However both should let you saturate most broadband connections
so in many cases its a moot point.


--
Cheers,

John.

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

On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:47:42 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 06/10/2020 12:00, T i m wrote:


I believe in the instance John oversaw they turned off the AP in the
router?

With the right kit (and centralised management), it might be possible to
include a non mesh wifi into a mix as park of a backhaul for a mesh
system. (normally mesh systems expect one AP to be connected via
ethernet to the main router - that becomes the mesh "root".

So Graeme's router AP could be that, or are you saying it would
typically have to be a 'Meshing' device itself?

(but in the case I described it was a layer of complexity not required
since he had an abundance of meshing APs).

That's what I was thinking re my an uplift to my mates multi-AP
solution, where (this sort of money) wouldn't be a solution.

I think I left it with only one port on the router being used, linked
to the 24 port managed switch (he has IP CCTV) so if we disabled the
router AP, a mesh unit connected there would cover a good chunk of the
house.

If they could be obedient / sensible user self installed, I could
connect to his laptop via TV and do any higher level admin if required
/ possible?

One directly on the router (router AP turned off), one on some Cat6 in
the kitchen (replacing existing AP), another on Cat6 in the media room
(replacing existing AP), another in the bedroom (replacing existing
AP) and one on the end of a PowerLine extension to the au-pairs room
(that is currently WiFi at the remote end that I would demote to
Ethernet only)?

Graeme, what make / model did you use OOI please?

Cheers, T i m

In message , T i m
writes

Graeme, what make / model did you use OOI please?

T i m, the router is Fritzbox 7530 and the repeaters are Fritxbox 3000.

Ours came from Zen, who provide quite a good explanation here :

https://www.zen.co.uk/broadband/everyroom

--
Graeme

On 06/10/2020 13:55, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:47:42 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 06/10/2020 12:00, T i m wrote:


I believe in the instance John oversaw they turned off the AP in the
router?

With the right kit (and centralised management), it might be possible to
include a non mesh wifi into a mix as park of a backhaul for a mesh
system. (normally mesh systems expect one AP to be connected via
ethernet to the main router - that becomes the mesh "root".

So Graeme's router AP could be that, or are you saying it would
typically have to be a 'Meshing' device itself?

Generally yes, but that might just be a firmware upgrade. For example,
with my Draytek 2862Vac, it currently does not do mesh. However a while
back they released firmware update for it, so that it can become a mesh
root. So basically you tick the box in the config to say "mesh", then
tell it to look for any mesh devices. It will list any it can see in
wireless range, and allow you to add them to the network. It then
duplicates the SSID etc onto the new devices. It can manage them all as
well, see what wifi clients are on each one, and tell you how many
wireless hops away each AP is.

(but in the case I described it was a layer of complexity not required
since he had an abundance of meshing APs).

That's what I was thinking re my an uplift to my mates multi-AP
solution, where (this sort of money) wouldn't be a solution.

I think I left it with only one port on the router being used, linked
to the 24 port managed switch (he has IP CCTV) so if we disabled the
router AP, a mesh unit connected there would cover a good chunk of the
house.

Yup

If they could be obedient / sensible user self installed, I could
connect to his laptop via TV and do any higher level admin if required
/ possible?

Possibly - depending on what kit you go for. The Deco units for example
do their config via an app - and its fairly painless to talk the user
though that. However once the first device is connected to the router,
and you can see its IP address in the routers DHCP list, then you can
also connect to that with a web browser and do stuff.

(if he has an android phone then you may also be able to remote control
that - not sure if TV does that yet)

The draytek kit can also configure with an app, or via the router's web
interface, or via their cloud based configuration platform (handy if you
wan central control over multiple clients with multiple sites)

One directly on the router (router AP turned off), one on some Cat6 in
the kitchen (replacing existing AP), another on Cat6 in the media room
(replacing existing AP), another in the bedroom (replacing existing
AP) and one on the end of a PowerLine extension to the au-pairs room
(that is currently WiFi at the remote end that I would demote to
Ethernet only)?

Having looked at a few more examples of the kit, unless its hybrid and
designed to use multiple media back haul connections, you are probably
going to find it easiest with one unit hardwired to the router, and
everything else wireless.

--
Cheers,

John.

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

On 06/10/2020 12:51, Graeme wrote:
In message , Chris Green
writes
Graeme wrote:

Only one name appears on the list of 'Local Area Connections', and that
name is the same as it always has been, although that means it is not
possible to see whether a device is connected to the original router or
either of the repeaters.Â* The mesh must be working though, as the signal
strength and speed is far better than in was, in areas that had a very
poor signal without the repeaters.

But would a 'non mesh' system with the same number of access points be
just as good - that's the question.

Within my limited knowledge of how these things work, the answer must be
yes, but with the proviso that only the mesh system seamlessly switches
devices from one source to another (i.e. always to the strongest signal)
without any user intervention.Â* But I may have misunderstood.

Non mesh can do that as well - sometimes called AP assisted roaming.
However many of the solutions are proprietary, so need the same range of
kit all over.

--
Cheers,

John.

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

On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 14:12:10 +0100, Graeme
wrote:

In message , T i m
writes

Graeme, what make / model did you use OOI please?

T i m, the router is Fritzbox 7530

Ah, that explains it, it's a Meshing router. ;-)

And ... high 5's Ftitxbox 7140 here that I've had for *ages*. ;-)

and the repeaters are Fritxbox 3000.

Makes sense. ;-)

Ours came from Zen, who provide quite a good explanation here :

https://www.zen.co.uk/broadband/everyroom

Cool, thanks.

My only thought re my old 7140 (FonWan (2 x Sipgate Voip lines))
router is if the throughput might be limited nowdays (along with it
being obsolete etc)?

Given how many routers others have been though since I've had mine,
even though they aren't cheap, I might be tempted to buy another.

Cheers, T i m

On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 09:33:10 +0100, Graeme
wrote:

In message , T i m
writes
I think John Rumm
has installed a Mesh system with a customer and the customer is happy?

Speaking as a very 'non techie', I recently installed a mesh system at
home. Installed means nothing more than plugging into the mains and
pushing pairing buttons.

OOI, this suggests you can also use the Fritz!Box router as a mesh
repeater (rather than it (automatically) being the master?).

https://preview.tinyurl.com/yyztpg5a

Cheers, T i m