"bc20" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:AQXrl.73524$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "ps56k" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:h_Trl.11816$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> As I was in our local library and discovered some kind of anomoly with
>> their setup,
>> which is discussed in another thread...
>>
>> I was thinking about options to setup the SSID for the WiFi in the
>> library.
>> They currently have what appears to be several 3com WAPs
>> that each has a "public" and a WEP enabled "secure" side.
>> Each has it's own SSID and appear to have their own MACs.
>>
>> Anyway - thoughts on having all 4 WAPs use the same SSID - XYZ ?
>> vs specific to an area XYZ1, XYZ2,
>> or XYZ-1st, XYZ-2nd, XYZ-meeting, XYZ-youth, etc
>>
>> Since there is no real "roaming" or mobile devices, I could go either
>> way.
>> My problem with the common SSID, is that when a problem happens,
>> I don't know which access point (from my laptop view) is having a problem
>> or issue,
>> and I can't tell if the 1st floor is weird and I'm trying to connect to
>> the weaker 2nd floor or what...
>
>
> Well.. I have my house completetly blanketed in 802.11a for my WLAN, which
> required a number of AP's.
>
> When I originally put it all together, I played with repeater and WDS
> modes, but couldn't settle on either because they cut your pipe and are
> nasty (collisions) in the air. My intended traffic wasn't just internet,
> but heavy LAN traffic.
>
> Repeater mode is just that. Every AP in repeater mode repeats everything.
> So, even though you are only connected to one AP, all the other AP's in
> repeater mode are also throwing your traffic (garbage in, garbage out)
> into the air. If all I wanted to do was pass internet traffic, doing the
> repeater thing would have been "good enough" though. Its simple, but ugly
> and nasty.
>
> WDS mode is more intelligent, as it is distributed, but it too cuts your
> pipe severely because the radios have to transmit/receive to each other in
> addition to the connected clients.
>
> What I ended up doing was connecting a wireless-ethernet bridge (client)
> to each AP. Basically, you are adding another radio so the AP's radio
> only has to take care of connected client(s). Keeps the pipe completetly
> intact. It did add quite a bit of extra cost, but was well worth it.
>
> All my 802.11a AP's (with their bridges) have the same SSID, but are well
> seperated on different frequencies. They are basically "stand alone"
> AP's, which happen to have the same SSID.
>
> As for the connected clients, they will automatically transfer to whatever
> AP is stronger (nearly) seamlessly. I.e., if I carry a laptop from one
> floor to another, it will transfer from one AP to another. Most of the
> time, it is seamless. When it isn't seamless, there is only like one
> second with no connectivity. Even then, it doesn't have to redo DHCP.
>
> I use (almost) all DLink hardware, so I can't comment on whether Linksys
> or the others behave the same way.
>
> As for knowing what AP I'm on, DLink's client software easily displays
> that. All AP's are listed by name, strength, channel, MAC, encryption
> type, etc... Its gives much more info that Window's WZC (or whatever its
> called)...
To put it even more simple, basically I am doing the exact same thing as
running four ethernet cables from a router to four AP's -- then giving all
four AP's the same SSID, WPA key, but putting them on different channels.
The ethernet-wireless bridges are simply just cable replacements...
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
