Ad
News

IBM Discards the Velvet Cloth with Less Expensive LCD Technology

Published on May 03, 2001

IBM researchers have figured out a new method of producing LCD displays that not only improves display quality but is also a heck of a lot cheaper than the method that has been used for the past 20 years. Read more

System makers support component description standards

Published on June 10, 2000

The RosettaNet organization, a trade group that counts nearly all the world's major system manufacturers as members, is reaching agreement on a standard method for exchanging technical information about electronic components. Read more

Sound blaster cleans contaminated soil

Published on September 07, 2006

Soil polluted by organic toxins can be blasted clean with ultrasound, say researchers in Australia. The method may prove to be more effective at cleaning up contamination from oil refineries, power stations and aluminium factories than existing methods. Read more

IBM lets polymers assemble nanoscale structures

Published on December 08, 2003

IBM Corp. Read more

Last Reviews & Articles

System Builder Marathon: Performance and Value

Published on October 31, 2008

Three dramatically different builds face off in show of performance, defining the real value of each. Our mainstream system is designed to meet the needs of most users. Who should spend more and who can live with less? Read more

System Builder Marathon: $500 Gaming PC

Published on October 30, 2008

On this, the second to last day of our System Builder Marathon series, we add a $500 gaming PC to the mix. It's not going to be as quick as our other two builds, but we think Paul was able to get some serious value from this thing. Read more

Tom's SBM: The $1,500 Mainstream PC

Published on October 29, 2008

We're following up yesterday's $4,500 behemoth with a more affordable $1,500 mid-range build. Let's see what sort of performance (and overclocking headroom) you can get when you spend one third of the money. Read more

System Builder Marathon: The $4,500 Super PC

Published on October 28, 2008

This month's System Builder Marathon spreads the system prices out even further to $4,500, $1,500, and $500. Is today’s $4,500 system really worth three times as much as an upper-mainstream performance machine? Read more

  Tom's Hardware UK and Ireland Forums » Wireless Networking » Setup, Configuration & Security » Repeating without WDS.. ¿Is this a better method?
 

Repeating without WDS.. ¿Is this a better method?

Advanced Search

There are 391 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here



Word :   Username :  
 
Bottom
Author
 Thread : Repeating without WDS.. ¿Is this a better method?
 
Profile: stranger
More Information

Hi guys..

Just wanted to ask your opinion about this method, and if it has a different name or something.

I have a wireless network on a group of bungalows, but the range easn't enough, so I installed 2 repeaters. The problem was that the comunication was slow, I tough it would be for a few reasons, first we have to use WEP, and second, the repeater has to receive signal from the main AP and send it to the clients, a lot of load for a single device.

So this is what I did.. I installed a wireless bridge on each repeating spot, receiving the signal from the main AP, and then conected the bridge to an AP with ehternet cable, and then configured it as an AP. So Bridge has an Antena, the AP has another, and i guess now the load is much less..

What you guys think about this solution?

Related Product

Register or log in to remove.

Profile: stranger
More Information

more than 80 views and not 1 reply?? ... :(

jjw
Profile: enthusiast
More Information

If I am not mistaken when you use WDS each jump causes the bandwidth to drop by a factor of 2. This may explain your performance drop. 2 jumps would be a reduction of 4x on the basic rate...

It sounds like you've come up with a solution.

There are several alternatives:

If the range is not far between the buildings then you could try a single access point with a High gain antenna. You will want to locate the antenna in a central location. High gain uni-directional antenna

The best solution would be to have a wired connection to each building with a dedicated access point at each building. But this means running wires...burial grade cat5 is not that expensive. Make sure to use different channels for each access point. (I recommend 1,6,11 in the US)

I think that your previous solution could be made to work better, if the main router is centrally located. I think buffalo-tech has an article on the best way to set up WDS. If I remember right, the central router is set up as normal, the others are set up as repeaters only??? To avoid speed penalties, only one jump/repeater should be made to the main router.

Note that the signal will be strongly degraded by going from in one building, out and back into the next building. This makes option 2 the best by far.

Profile: stranger
More Information

This solution I'm using is to avoid that loss factor of 2... The thing is not to set up repeaters, but instead bridges with access points.. So normally you connect an AP to a ethernet line.. most of the times to a router.. and then you give conectivity to wireless clients, but with this method, you bridge the ethernet conector into wireless, and connect to a remote central AP wich has the Internet conection...

This would be a schematic of the solution..

http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/5783/bridgerepswh4.th.gif

jjw
Profile: enthusiast
More Information

Your solution is OK. The main issue is that there are only 3 non-overlapping frequency ranges for 802.11b/g. You will be OK until you add a 3rd bridge and access point.

What are the distances involved? (bridge to bridge?)

Profile: stranger
More Information

From the main access point to each bridge there is about 60 meters... the central AP has an omnidirectional antena, a big one.. not the factory one.. and bridges have directional antenas pointing straight to the central AP. the APs conected to the bridges have omnidirectional antenas also..

Distance between bridges is about 40 meters...

jjw
Profile: enthusiast
More Information

I think your original throughput issues were likely due to the WDS repeaters trying to associate with each other instead of the main base station.

If you are happy with what you have, don't change a thing. Just watch the channels the bridges and access points are set to.


  Tom's Hardware UK and Ireland Forums » Wireless Networking » Setup, Configuration & Security » Repeating without WDS.. ¿Is this a better method?

Go to:
 

Google ads