extending the LAN with WLAN

Hello,

Since the topic changed, let me start a new thread, although the project
is the same. So the LAN is all planned, but I'd like to add WLAN
coverage in the house, even though there are plenty of gigabit plugs in
every room.

Here are the house plans, 2 floors, very simple design:

http://personal.inet.fi/private/sand...WLAN-lower.jpg
http://personal.inet.fi/private/sand...WLAN-upper.jpg

WLAN coverage is needed in the red areas, while 802.11g is probably
enough, 802.11n access points don't cost much more.

While the wireless part in those is theoretically 300Mbps, the wired
port is 100Mbps on most. Access points in the "n" range with a gigabit
LAN port are still quite expensive.

The house has a solid concrete build and I think I'll need 2 access
points. I'd like to have the antennas well hidden though, or ceiling
antennas like the Zyxel ZyAIR EXT-104.

Taking advice and suggestions, thank you in advance

Lorenzo

On 09/01/2011 15:52, Lorenzo Sandini wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Since the topic changed, let me start a new thread, although the project
> is the same. So the LAN is all planned, but I'd like to add WLAN
> coverage in the house, even though there are plenty of gigabit plugs in
> every room.
>
> Here are the house plans, 2 floors, very simple design:
>
> http://personal.inet.fi/private/sand...WLAN-lower.jpg
> http://personal.inet.fi/private/sand...WLAN-upper.jpg
>
> WLAN coverage is needed in the red areas, while 802.11g is probably
> enough, 802.11n access points don't cost much more.
>
> While the wireless part in those is theoretically 300Mbps, the wired
> port is 100Mbps on most. Access points in the "n" range with a gigabit
> LAN port are still quite expensive.
>
> The house has a solid concrete build and I think I'll need 2 access
> points. I'd like to have the antennas well hidden though, or ceiling
> antennas like the Zyxel ZyAIR EXT-104.
>
> Taking advice and suggestions, thank you in advance
>
> Lorenzo

What advice are you looking for ? Surely, I'd have thought the "bigger"
the antenna, the more focused the signal, and therefore reduced spread.
So, would kinda avoid that type of antenna unless it's something you
think you specifically need.

Where's your "solid concrete" ? Internal walls, floors ?

I live on the 1st floor of an old building. My sister lives on the
ground floor. We had a six room extension built 3 years ago, I get 3
rooms, she gets 3 rooms.

1 WAP serves all of the extension, both ground and 1st floor. The signal
from this wap doesn't make it through to the old part of the house, due
to stone walls.
In my flat, 1 WAP serves the rooms in the old part. Walls are lathe and
plaster. This signal does reach dwnstairs, but they have their own WAP too.
Downstairs, another WAP servers my sisters old part of the house. It's
roughly in her hall, and the signal does reach my living room.

I'd be tempted to say, that one WAP may serve all your depends, but
depends on the construction of your internal walls. Otherwise, go for
the 2 as you've suggested.

Cheers

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Lorenzo Sandini wrote:
> Access points in the "n" range with a gigabit
> LAN port are still quite expensive.

You surely don't need a gigabit connection between your wired LAN and
your access point? The rate-limiting connection will be the wireless
one, and the wired one only needs to be as fast.

It depends to some extent, of course, on the number of simultaneous
wireless connections you'll be trying to service through the one access
point ... but you propose to have several wireless connections
simultaneously running high-bandwidth applications (streaming HD video
to a tablet ... no, to several tablets) you probably needn't worry
much. You will also have wired gigabit access for when speed is
critical, after all.

> The house has a solid concrete build and I think I'll need 2 access
> points. I'd like to have the antennas well hidden though, or ceiling
> antennas like the Zyxel ZyAIR EXT-104.

If the internal walls are all concrete and steel you may need an AP in
each room (in which case the antennae can be tiny), otherwise you may
only need one altogether. Have you actually tried any WiFi kit in the
building?

Cheers,
Daniel.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, I wrote:
> > Access points in the "n" range with a gigabit
> > LAN port are still quite expensive.
>
> You surely don't need a gigabit connection between your wired LAN and
> your access point? The rate-limiting connection will be the wireless
> one, and the wired one only needs to be as fast.

Sorry ... you're talking about 802.11n and I was thinking about 802.11g.

I still wonder what devices/applications you might want to connect
wirelessly that would tax a wireless-n -- or wired 100mb/s --
connection.

However, GB kit like the Netgear WNAP 210 is available at a bit under a
hundred quid (plus VAT) ... is that too expensive?

Cheers,
Daniel.

10.1.2011 14:51, Daniel James kirjoitti:
> In article<(E-Mail Removed)>, I wrote:
>>> Access points in the "n" range with a gigabit
>>> LAN port are still quite expensive.
>>
>> You surely don't need a gigabit connection between your wired LAN and
>> your access point? The rate-limiting connection will be the wireless
>> one, and the wired one only needs to be as fast.
>
> Sorry ... you're talking about 802.11n and I was thinking about 802.11g.
>
> I still wonder what devices/applications you might want to connect
> wirelessly that would tax a wireless-n -- or wired 100mb/s --
> connection.
>
> However, GB kit like the Netgear WNAP 210 is available at a bit under a
> hundred quid (plus VAT) ... is that too expensive?
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel.
>
>
Well the idea is to get good coverage of the area, and a gigabit link
from the wireless APs to my switches is not absolutely needed, 100Mbps
should be enough.

The house is being built, so testing now is not an option, until all the
room walls and floor heating is installed. I'm in eastern Finland, near
the russian border, and when it's cold, it's cold.

I am planning ahead, since we're starting to do the electrical wiring in
3-4 weeks. A single AP covering the whole house and yard would be
perfect, but doesn't sound possible, even with a strong antenna.

I could place ceiling-mounted PoE "visible" APs like the Trendnet
TEW-653AP or the D-Link AirPremier DWL-3260AP, but some reviews suggest
the "wall penetration" is very low and they are ok for use as
single-room APs. They could be ok in the lower floor, but for upstairs,
I'm afraid I'd have to put one in each room.

Another option would be to place a single AP with a strong sector
antenna, but what would be a good position in the upper floor ?

Lorenzo

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Lorenzo Sandini wrote:
> The house is being built, so testing now is not an option, until
> all the room walls and floor heating is installed. I'm in eastern
> Finland, near the russian border, and when it's cold, it's cold.

Yes, I realized from reading your earlier post that the house was new.
That's why I was suggesting testing as early as possible (but no
earlier, obviously).

Floor heating may have an effect. If that involves a series of wires or
metal pipes running under the floor it could make your floors more than
usually impenetrable by WiFi (if plastic pipes are use it probably
won't).

What are the (internal) walls made from?

> I am planning ahead, since we're starting to do the electrical
> wiring in 3-4 weeks. A single AP covering the whole house and yard
> would be perfect, but doesn't sound possible, even with a strong
> antenna.

You won't know until you try ...

Cheers,
Daniel.

Hey, I came across this amazing site and wanted to share it with m
fellow Water Pipes enthusiasts.

'Smoke Concepts' (http://www.smokeconcept.scom)

'Indian Chillum' (http://www.smokeconcepts.com)

_*And_get_this,_they_offer_free_lifetime_replaceme nt!!!*


--
Offendadext