Wireless bridging between two access points

[sparky0000]

Hi,

Currently I have an access point at one end of the house to serve the computers in the house, however due to our large brick walls and the distance between some PC's and the AP the signal can be very weak. So I have been looking at extending the wireless range by buying another AP with bridge capability and place this in between the existing AP and the PC’s that are some distance from the existing AP. Therefore to bridge with the existing AP and allow these PC’s to connect onto the network. Is this possible?

 

[lydiagal]

Hi. It still also depends on the infrastructure of your house. I believe a 2nd AP will help but..think you got to try.

 

[mingpayling2]

Sure. You can use an access point in repeater mode. Cisco Access Points handles this very well, but this setup will work really good only with Cisco devices.


A.K.Pollard

http://www.tribecaexpress.com

 

[newisp]

As much as this sounds like heresy, I would have to say the easiest, least expensive and most reliable way of doing this is to run Cat5 cable between the two access points. From there, you can setup roaming.

Another suggestion is to "bridge" them through phone wires using Ethersplit

http://www.ethersplit.com/

or possibly some of the Powerline equipment

http://www.linksys.com/press/press.asp?prid=57&cyear=2001.

Just a suggestion...

 

[InnoTech]

you know you may want to look into the Linksys Ethernet Wireless bridge. This should do what you're asking and work striaght out of the box.

http://www.linksys.com/products/group.asp?grid=33&scid=35

"Jack of all trades. Master of none."

 

[LloydSev]

Just as an idea.. why don't you put the AP in a more centralized position, closer to the brick wall, so that you can shoot louder through the brick(possibly getting what you want), and also being able to surf from the original spot.. this configuration wouldn't cost you any more money.

 

[jpeg]

Hi
I'v got a simler problem trying to reach 50 different points from one location. My wireless will reach 10 points from the office because its line of sight but the other 40 have a large building blocking the signal. I would like to put an outside antenna on the buildings roof to send the signal to the other 40. My problem is finding the right type of equipment to do the job. The distance from the office to the building is aprox. 150 ft. Is it possible to do wireless rather then having to lay cable to the building?

 

[jimbopalmer]

Jpeg no idea what you hope to do by sharing wireless 40 ways, but be very alert to effectively having no bandwidth left. if you run 11 mbps to the large building you own, (effectively 5.5 mbps) then repeat it from there, you half your speed. you now have 2.75 mps shared 40 ways so the kinds of apps you can run will be VERY limited.

no Gaming, no VOIP, no streaming files, limited interactivity.

one alternitive would be multiple directional antennas, and a higher speed link back from the large building to the wired network, but that is pricey compared to an omnidirectional antenna

depending on the number of computers in each bulding, 40 buildings sharing one network is going to really perform badly. (my networks spans 45 buildings, and uses switched gigabit fiber trunks to make the speed acceptable for 1000 users, wireless is a edge technology, not a core technology) I tried to remain child-like, all I acheived was childish.

 

[InnoTech]

until wireless thoughput and larger bandwidth is more technicaly stable, i would stick to conventional fiber/copper backbones. even with 5ghz/802.11a you are still greatly limiting your bandwidth versus a land line.

i think of wireless to be a good technology for a partial network implementation and WISP's. "Jack of all trades. Master of none."

 

[mingpayling2]

If jpeg is simply trying to share an Internet connection between 50 sites, then shared Ethernet wireless can do it. However if jpeg is trying to create a fast Ethernet wireless LAN, then 802.11b is not the solution.

jpeg can mount a omnidirectional antenna with a root access point on the tall building and make all the other 50 sites remote stations with directional antennas. The Internet connection will be connected at the office which will be one of the remote sites. With a good bandwidth of say 1Mbps, jpeg will have more than enough to share between all the sites. In this design, the wireless link between office and any particular site will never go below 400 kbps. There is no need to set any location as a repeater point.

As I said before the drawback on this design is sharing data between nodes on the network.

Abdullah Pollard

http://www.tribecaexpress.com

 

[tennisbuff]

I'm trying to also extend the range of a wireless system. I just installed in a small law office a Linksys BEFW11S4 wireless router with a booster. I'm able to get a decent signal to 10 out of 11 users and no signal to the upstairs farthest office. What I want to do is take a second identical router w/booster and link that to the 1st router to create another access point and move that right below the office I have no signal. I'm not sure of the proper setup on Router #2. Do I clone the mac address from the 1st router to the 2nd router; disable the DHCP on the 2nd router; set the same SSID and encryption and channel to the 2nd router? I'm going to run a CAT5 from the 1st router to the 2nd wireless router but do I connect the CAT5 in the 1st router to one of the Hubs or use the LINK port? Is my thinking correct here? Thanks for your help. Mark

 

[mingpayling2]

The main reason why you are having problems getting to the 10 location has to do with the equipment that you are using.

I am amused when I read about difficulties with cheap under rated wireless devices. Most of these devices are giving Ethernet wireless a bad name. Some people do not spend money for good stuff such as Cisco Aironet, Proxim, 3COM and Vivato and expect to get execellent result. The radio in a wireless device is the most important element. Check the sensitivety of the radio before buying wireless devices. Another problem with cheap devices is their inability to prevent broadcasting their ESID, therefore hackers can steal your bandwidth.

If you want good performance, buy the good stuff.

 

[tennisbuff]

Thanks for the "help" mingpayling2 that was very "useful". Just in case someone is really interested in how to set up a 2nd AP using another wireless router, here is what I did to make this work. Router #1 IP 192.168.1.1 Router #2 IP 192.168.1.2 Create another unique SSID for the 2nd router. Disable DHCP on Router #2. keep encryption wep key the same on both. CAT5e run for hub of Router #1 to UPLINK on #2. Fire it up and the clients automatically recognize the 2nd router. Where before I had a poor to good signal, now the worst client running has a very good signal and almost all of them have excellent.

 

[pritska]

In answer to the original posting, I can say this.

Using a buffalo airstation, it is possible to use one as the booster between the first sender, and the end point where there is low or no signal.

The things to make sure are they have the same ESSID, are on the same subnet and have the roaming option enabled.

PLease let us know what your results are.

 

[LloydSev]

And once again I bring up my point.. why don't you just put the one AP in the middle.. so that you'll get a Good signal to both stations? This requires NO extra money!

 

[mingpayling2]

The solutions so far will cost more than the price of one good access point.

 

[iamadentist]

I've done exactly what you propose and it works fine. You can buy an AP without a bridge it has just one input for a Cat 5. Another way is to buy a simple system that uses your electrical wire. You simply connect one unit to your existing bridge and plug it in the wall. The other unit is a transmitter that you plug in the wall and it acts as a remote wireless AP. The whole thing costs about a $100 and you don't have to string Cat 5. The only problem is that you'll only have wireless at the new AP. If you use Cat 5 and a bridging AP you will have much faster connection at the remote AP by simply connecting the computer directly to Cat 5. That's what I did. Both a remote wirless AP and a wired connection. It works fine. I have an old desktop connected with Cat 5 that connects to my dental software, and a remote AP that I use with a portable in my treatment rooms.

This is an overly long way of saying that it may be smart to buy a wireless AP with a bridge. They cost a bit more than a pure wireless AP but they are more flexible. Wireless is great for surfing the net, but to connect to relatively complex or maybe just antiquated software, Cat 5 is much faster.