Wireless Fall Back

I've got a small home network which consists of wired and wireless
sections.

The range is very eratic on my wireless section and nowhere near what
the manufacturers suggest is possible (in ideal conditions).

I live in a 1930s brick built bungalow so there is no special
insulation causing problems.

My Netgear PC card appears to work OK with my Netgear 54mbps Access
Point but I appear to be getting about 30 feet only out of a new
Linksys 11mbps USB adapter. This is a moveable device with an aerial
so I was actually expecting it to be better than the Netgear PC card.

Anyone any ideas how to know if the automatic fall back is working, my
Linksys software monitor appears to suggest it stays at 11mbps as the
signal drops.

Geoff Lane

In most cases, using network devices made from the same manufacturer works
best. If you have rpoblems with wireless quality and strength, here are a
few suggestions:
1. Go wired when possible
2. Aim your antennas correctly or get better ones (omni-directionals are
ideal)
3. Try different channels on your WLAN
4. Make sure your RX/TX power is set to the highest possible
or if you really want better range,
5. Get a signal booster for your AP/Router, if NetGear makes them.

"Geoff Lane" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I've got a small home network which consists of wired and wireless
> sections.
>
> The range is very eratic on my wireless section and nowhere near what
> the manufacturers suggest is possible (in ideal conditions).
>
> I live in a 1930s brick built bungalow so there is no special
> insulation causing problems.
>
> My Netgear PC card appears to work OK with my Netgear 54mbps Access
> Point but I appear to be getting about 30 feet only out of a new
> Linksys 11mbps USB adapter. This is a moveable device with an aerial
> so I was actually expecting it to be better than the Netgear PC card.
>
> Anyone any ideas how to know if the automatic fall back is working, my
> Linksys software monitor appears to suggest it stays at 11mbps as the
> signal drops.
>
> Geoff Lane
>

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:58:55 -0700, "Jordan Freeland"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> I've got a small home network which consists of wired and wireless
>> sections.
>>
>> The range is very eratic on my wireless section and nowhere near what
>> the manufacturers suggest is possible (in ideal conditions).

>In most cases, using network devices made from the same manufacturer works
>best.

I would have stayed with Netgear except that the Linksys USB was more
suitable for the circunstances and the Dell was supplied with the
handheld.

> If you have rpoblems with wireless quality and strength, here are a
>few suggestions:
>1. Go wired when possible

As mentioned I have a mixture.

>2. Aim your antennas correctly or get better ones (omni-directionals are
>ideal)

How do you aim it, mine is like a stick, I thought vertical was the
best.

>3. Try different channels on your WLAN

Tried that with my Dell card, made no difference, haven't tried it
with the Linksys

>4. Make sure your RX/TX power is set to the highest possible
>or if you really want better range,

Is that a card setting or an AP setting - I can only recall it in
relation to a modem.

>5. Get a signal booster for your AP/Router, if NetGear makes them.

New to WiFi so am not sure if Netgear make one or not.

Geoff Lane

"Jordan Freeland" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

>> The range is very eratic on my wireless section and nowhere near what
>> the manufacturers suggest is possible (in ideal conditions).

Why would you expect that it would? Ideal conditions consists of
an open field with no obstructions.

>> I live in a 1930s brick built bungalow so there is no special
>> insulation causing problems.

2.4 GHz is easily attenuated by so much as some tree leaves
in the line of sight. I know because I had bridged two houses
about a block apart during winter. Come spring the leaves
started causing me problems had to trim some branches.

Now lets talk about sheet rock. Causes minimal problems when
you are shooting straight through only one layer. Now take a laptop
and watch the signal go down as you move it so it goes through the
same sheet rock at a long angle, so that much of the line of sight
is within the body of that sheet. Also water pipes and such can
cause you problems. Brick is probably a decent stopper too
if there's enough thickness of it.

Not to mention that 2.4 GHz is also the range used for microwave
ovens, those X-10 cameras, cordless phones etc. Any one of which when
switched on will cause problems. And your neighbor may switch on
his 802.11b network on top of that. Good to try switching
channels on the AP and see if that lessens interference and
thus increases range. I used to work in a building with lots
of cordless phones and I managed to acquire a bunch of 900 MHz
phones and convince people to squash the 2.4 GHz purchases.

Usual recommendation is you are better served by putting up a
second AP than a booster. Boosters are a poor solution IMHO
mainly because they contribute to area frequency pollution and
tend to drown out weaker devices. Just run ethernet to a convenient
location for placing the second AP. Like this:

----WAN---ROUTER/SWITCH--------AP1-Ch.1
|
|
|
AP2-Ch.11


--
Vincent Fox
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!pri sm!vf5
Internet: (E-Mail Removed)

Geoff Lane <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

>How do you aim it, mine is like a stick, I thought vertical was the
>best.

Omnis have roughly a donut pattern with the aerial through
the center of it. They radiate out best from the sides of
the aerial not the ends. So for example if it is straight up
and mounted in the attic, you may have a signal "black hole"
in the areas directly below it. Lets say you put it high
in one end of the house, in that case you may want to tilt
the antennas a bit so one side of it's radiation pattern
is hitting the greatest area of your house and the other side
is just going out uselessly into the sky.

>>3. Try different channels on your WLAN

Change channels on the AP, the client card just scans and
finds whatever the AP is using, so changing it on the card
will not stick.


--
Vincent Fox
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!pri sm!vf5
Internet: (E-Mail Removed)

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 19:57:59 +0000 (UTC), (E-Mail Removed)
(Vincent Fox) wrote:

>>> The range is very eratic on my wireless section and nowhere near what
>>> the manufacturers suggest is possible (in ideal conditions).
>
>Why would you expect that it would? Ideal conditions consists of
>an open field with no obstructions.

Naivety perhaps, believing the LARGE print :-))) Seriously, the
claimed 300 feet in an indoor environment I believe was very
optimistic but I was hoping for a bit more than 30 feet, perhaps even
at a lower speed.

>>> I live in a 1930s brick built bungalow so there is no special
>>> insulation causing problems.
>
>2.4 GHz is easily attenuated by so much as some tree leaves
>in the line of sight.

I thought it was only UK railways that were affected by leaves.

> I know because I had bridged two houses
>about a block apart during winter. Come spring the leaves
>started causing me problems had to trim some branches.

The wire is looking better by the minute.

>Not to mention that 2.4 GHz is also the range used for microwave
>ovens, those X-10 cameras, cordless phones etc.

Guessed as much but my cordless phone is brilliant throughout the
house, even beyond a brick wall and 60 feet up my garden.

>Usual recommendation is you are better served by putting up a
>second AP than a booster.

I will look in to that, I've got a wired system as well as the
wireless one now so I am not going to dispence with it.

The wireless is brilliant for the laptop and the small handheld I have
recently bought so I will just adjust the position of the devices.

> Just run ethernet to a convenient
>location for placing the second AP. Like this:
>
>----WAN---ROUTER/SWITCH--------AP1-Ch.1
> |
> |
> |
> AP2-Ch.11

Thanks, I can understand that.

Curiosity, with your network did you use devices from the same
manufacturer, I've been led to believe they work better that way or is
that just referring to the setting up.

Geoff Lane

Geoff Lane <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

>On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 19:57:59 +0000 (UTC), (E-Mail Removed)
>(Vincent Fox) wrote:

>>>> The range is very eratic on my wireless section and nowhere near what
>>>> the manufacturers suggest is possible (in ideal conditions).
>>
>>Why would you expect that it would? Ideal conditions consists of
>>an open field with no obstructions.

>Naivety perhaps, believing the LARGE print :-))) Seriously, the
>claimed 300 feet in an indoor environment I believe was very
>optimistic but I was hoping for a bit more than 30 feet, perhaps even
>at a lower speed.

Sometimes I get the problem that particular units do not
like each other. For example the Linksys cards don't seem
to have very much range at all for me, whereas the Orinoco
card can pick up my D-Link AP from half a block outside the house.

>>>> I live in a 1930s brick built bungalow so there is no special
>>>> insulation causing problems.
>>
>>2.4 GHz is easily attenuated by so much as some tree leaves
>>in the line of sight.

>I thought it was only UK railways that were affected by leaves.

>> I know because I had bridged two houses
>>about a block apart during winter. Come spring the leaves
>>started causing me problems had to trim some branches.

>The wire is looking better by the minute.

>>Not to mention that 2.4 GHz is also the range used for microwave
>>ovens, those X-10 cameras, cordless phones etc.

>Guessed as much but my cordless phone is brilliant throughout the
>house, even beyond a brick wall and 60 feet up my garden.

Is your cordless a 2.4 GHz unit and is it out of the
base unit when you have more problems? When cordless
are off their base, they are still chatting to the base
unit and creating interference even though you are
not using it for a call.

>>Usual recommendation is you are better served by putting up a
>>second AP than a booster.

>I will look in to that, I've got a wired system as well as the
>wireless one now so I am not going to dispence with it.

>The wireless is brilliant for the laptop and the small handheld I have
>recently bought so I will just adjust the position of the devices.

>> Just run ethernet to a convenient
>>location for placing the second AP. Like this:
>>
>>----WAN---ROUTER/SWITCH--------AP1-Ch.1
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> AP2-Ch.11

>Thanks, I can understand that.

>Curiosity, with your network did you use devices from the same
>manufacturer, I've been led to believe they work better that way or is
>that just referring to the setting up.

They are all supposed to interoperate. However sometimes you
have to mess with the settings a bit to make it work better.
I find Linksys cards don't seem to me to have much
range at all compared to SMC or Orinoco/Agere/Avaya cards.
I am using an Orinoco gold with a D-Link 900AP+ as the AP
and it seems to work very well.


--
Vincent Fox
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!pri sm!vf5
Internet: (E-Mail Removed)

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 20:06:56 +0000 (UTC), (E-Mail Removed)
(Vincent Fox) wrote:

>Geoff Lane <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>>How do you aim it, mine is like a stick, I thought vertical was the
>>best.
>
>Omnis have roughly a donut pattern with the aerial through
>the center of it. They radiate out best from the sides of
>the aerial not the ends.

What's the pattern then for a PC card that just sticks out the side of
the laptop with no auxillary aerial?

That was one of the reasons I went for a Linksys USB rather than the
Netgear, the linksys has an aerial that can move whereas the Netgear
just plugs in the back or front of the computer.

Geoff Lane

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 02:31:52 +0000 (UTC), (E-Mail Removed)
(Vincent Fox) wrote:


>>Guessed as much but my cordless phone is brilliant throughout the
>>house, even beyond a brick wall and 60 feet up my garden.
>
>Is your cordless a 2.4 GHz unit and is it out of the
>base unit when you have more problems? When cordless
>are off their base, they are still chatting to the base
>unit and creating interference even though you are
>not using it for a call.

Never knew that, I'll look in to it.

Thanks.

Geoff Lane

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 19:57:59 +0000 (UTC), (E-Mail Removed)
(Vincent Fox) wrote:


>Usual recommendation is you are better served by putting up a
>second AP than a booster. Boosters are a poor solution IMHO
>mainly because they contribute to area frequency pollution and
>tend to drown out weaker devices. Just run ethernet to a convenient
>location for placing the second AP. Like this:
>
>----WAN---ROUTER/SWITCH--------AP1-Ch.1
> |
> |
> |
> AP2-Ch.11

Is AP1 Ch1 a typo error or is it a different channel to AP2?

Geoff Lane