|
eames posted:Not sure if this is the right thread, but here it goes! I need to cover ~40 different rooms (over two floors, roughly 20x50 meters per floor) using Wi-Fi. You should be fine with between 5 and 6 Access Points for a property that size, providing the rooms aren't made of out concrete or encased in steel. My suggestions: - Purchase a PoE switch that's managed with enough power budget to power your selected Access Points at full power requirement. In my experience, Access Points won't draw full power unless you have many users online, or plenty of activity. The PoE switch is important, as it'll allow you to reset the devices remotely without entering the hotel rooms. - Purchase one of your selected Access Points first. Use this Access Point to conduct signal testing to establish the location for each of your Access Points. - Apply static IP settings to each Access Point so you can remotely manage it. - You can cover the Access Points with housing made from PVC or Wood with minimal impact to your signal. Look for electrical supply stores which usually have some PVC boxes that work very well. Alternatively, run surface mount cabling within the rooms and mount the Access Point to the ceiling. Most new Access Points now look like smoke detectors. Some parts that may help you: Switches Cisco SMB - SRW208P-K9-NA (8 port managed 10/100 PoE switch) Cisco SMB - SRW224G4P-K9-NA (24 port managed 10/100 PoE switch) Access Points Cisco WAP321 (Each can support up to 25 users) Cisco WAP121 (This one is cheaper, and probably fine for your use. Supports up to 10 users each) Cisco WAP200 (Fairly solid Access Point, I've used thousands. Soon to be discontinued and only Wireless-G - Unwieldy external Antenna's) I've been designing hotel systems and structured cabling for years now, if you have any questions you can PM me. Edit: I should mention I haven't really liked the WAP121 very much. Personally, I'd probably take the WAP200 over the WAP121. In your hotel environment, you won't need over Wireless-G for quite a while yet. I'm sure the ISP connection to the building isn't over 50Mbps. Windowlicker fucked around with this message at 00:35 on Mar 19, 2013 |
#
¿
Mar 19, 2013 00:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
eames posted:Thank you, I will look into the Cisco setup. I like the specs of the Cisco WAP321s because I’m dealing with steel reinforced concrete walls and a 200 Mbit fiber line here. That steal and concrete will reduce or eliminate signal bleed like crazy. quote:I’d love to know how you deal with access authentication, encryption and traffic shaping in your deployments. Here are some examples of companies that do this. You more or less need an appliance/router/gateway that has the capability integrated: http://ihotel.intello.com/en http://www.guest-tek.com/ http://www.superclick.com/ quote:We used a Zyxel G-4100v2 which has a simple one-touch thermal printer for vouchers as well as some surprisingly useful technologies (for example what they call "IP Plug any Play", it somehow forces a working DHCP connection on a client that has static IP/subnet/DNS-settings configured on their network adapter). I'd personally steer clear of Zyxel. I've worked extensively with the Access Points, PoE switches, and DSLAM's created by that company, and found them to be very problematic and needlessly complex. That's personal preference though, if it's working for you that's great  quote:The problem with that thing is that it just does not scale with the recent jump in bandwidth/usage requirements... most guests brings two devices, they use youtube/skype/facetime/netflix excessively, upload pictures, etc. You may be able to avoid a guest authentication provider as for a property with 40 rooms it might not make sense to bring a third party in to handle authentication. I'm pretty sure there are some Cisco routers on the market that will allow traffic shaping that could get you where you need to go. Sonicwall also makes some fairly good content filtering devices that will block some (Not all) torrents. At a property that small you could probably just enable AP Isolation and it should keep your wireless clients separated.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2013 13:47
|
|
|
gggiiimmmppp posted:They have an ancient hero WRT54g v4 running tomato alongside the cable modem, and a few years ago to try to fix their wifi issues I installed a second router, a WRT54g v8 running DD-WRT micro, which I use for WDS from another spot which ostensibly has wifi line of sight to everyone. It's a big house though and wifi doesn't like the walls either so it still gets patchy at the extremes. You will see a significant increase in range from a newer router, however I'm fairly sure that's due to the addition of MIMO. In our testing in a lab setting, Wireless-N is not what will increase coverage radius on an Access Point. Wireless-N is more a reference to the data transfer rate. I personally think if you replace your two routers with something more current, it should improve service throughout the house. You are running custom firmware, is there a reason? Are there features you're missing that the custom firmware adds? The reason why I ask, is that custom firmware can quite often create an unstable device or irregularities in service. Unless you have a special requirement that the default firmware isn't fulfilling, I'd suggest to keep things stock. Some notes: - Antenna upgrades probably won't have the impact you are hoping they will. - If you are using a two router setup, make sure the second router has a static IP address within the subnet of the first router. And absolutely make sure you have the DHCP server in the second router disabled, or it'll cause instability on the network. I would personally advise you to stay away from extenders. Extenders won't be as stable as a dedicated Access Point. If you already have the cable run to support the extra Access Point, you might as well just upgrade the routers to something with a newer set of radio's. Edit: MIMO If you are curious: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIMO
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2013 13:52
|
|
|
gggiiimmmppp posted:
Honestly the cleanest way to extend wireless signal is through the addition of Access Points. My experience is anything else tends to be sloppy and more unstable. The radio's in the home based routers are frequently virtually identical to the radio's used in smaller business applications. There's nothing wrong with grabbing a few refurbished routers, disabling the DHCP server on all but one, and using them as AP's. Edit: To be clear how I've done it personally: Primary Router: Changed IP to 172.16.1.1 Changed DHCP Scope to a non-standard range DHCP Enabled Secondary (Access Point) router: Changed IP to 172.16.1.2 Disabled DHCP **Link is connected from LAN port of Primary router to LAN port of Secondary router. (Don't use the WAN on the secondary) ***Set static channels on the 2.4Ghz radios on both routers so they are either 1,6,11 and don't set two 1's or two 6's or two 11's or they'll interfear. ****Firmware on all devices is stock. Windowlicker fucked around with this message at 15:46 on Mar 23, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2013 15:33
|
|
|
Fil5000 posted:I'm having some issues with this E4200. I've got it, flashed it to DD-WRT I have an E4200. I get the impression there wasn't much love put into the firmware, so I didn't use it. http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php?title=Linksys_E4200 Lines like this scare the poo poo out of me from a networking perspective: quote:Support for the E4200 is still very much a work in progress at this time, outstanding issues reported have included WAN stability, and both 2.4GHz and 5GHz Radio stability. Edit: - WAN stability as a problem: The port on your router that's connected to your modem is fucky. - 2.4Ghz/5Ghz Radio stability as a problem: Don't bet on your wireless working. - If you disable your WAN, you are disabling the port that your modem is connecting to. Windowlicker fucked around with this message at 15:52 on Mar 23, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2013 15:36
|
|
|
Parlett316 posted:Windowlicker, what AP would you suggest for a house using Wireless N? If you want something that's a pure Access Point, the Cisco WAP321 is decent for the price point. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833150173 Alternatively, if you want something cheaper I'd look for a refurb Cisco. Anything with simultaneous 2.4Ghz/5Ghz and Gigabit ports should work. Edit: To give you an idea, at my place I'm using a Cisco E4200 as my primary router/AP/DHCP server. I have an old Cisco E3000 that acts as an Access Point and switch. The two devices are connected LAN port to LAN port, and the E3000 has a static IP / disabled DHCP server. The E4200 provides DHCP addresses to any clients connecting via the E3000's LAN or Wireless. Windowlicker fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Mar 23, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2013 21:50
|
|
|
Fil5000 posted:Do you suggest going back to the default firmware then? Or tomato? If you rely on that device and it has to be stable, I'd go back to the stock firmware. In my opinion, you only want to move away from stock firmware if that firmware isn't doing something you need it to.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2013 21:51
|
|
|
diehlr posted:More and more retail outlets are carrying the powerline extenders. I think it truly is your best bet. Try and find a local place with a decent return policy and give it a whirl. The 200 and 500 mbps units have almost always worked for me and I've deployed dozens of pairs over the past few months. I have had nothing but bad experiences with powerline hardware personally. Then again, I haven't tried installing them in a house, only in businesses.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 00:04
|
|
|
Fil5000 posted:Given the issues I was having with that router I picked up a couple of tplink power line adapters yesterday. They work fantastically for me - I've gone from getting 1.5mb/sec downloads from Steam via my ISP provided wireless router to getting more like 4mb/s. It's been consistent as well. I understand it depends on the wiring in your house, although for reference mine must date from the late 70s/early 80s and it's working pretty great. From a business perspective, here is the problem. Powerline hardware is only typically used when structured cabling is not present. Structured cabling, is usually not present when the cabling conduit/pathways don't exist. Cabling conduit/pathways typically don't exist in buildings created before 1980. For whatever reason, construction companies were either too cheap or didn't think far enough ahead to add a decent amount of space for future cabling needs. This leaves surface mounting and costly coring/drilling or access hatch installation as the only possible option (Other than DSL or Mesh, but we won't get into that) What's common about buildings built before 1980? Absolutely terrible electrical systems that aren't suited for data. Basically, the entire powerline model from a large building/business perspective is a horrible idea. In a house, it's probably fine. Personally, I see a house as easy enough to cable I'd probably just install Access Points anyway. I personally don't handle cabling professionally, however I do design it. I did however run an Access Point into my parents tower from the main house. To give you an idea of how tricky that was, this is the house:  Personally I think you'll have a much more robust home network if you stick to an Access Point or Ethernet cabled solution.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2013 18:00
|
|
|
Parlett316 posted:God I hope that tower thing has a spiral staircase. Yes, all the way to the top. The kitchen has a black and white checker-board floor too. First Floor - Den Second Floor - Bedroom with Shower/Washroom Third Floor - Full kitchen Fourth Floor - Party room with small bar. I installed a Cisco WAP200 on the ground floor with the antenna's aimed to provide vertical coverage. You get almost full bars at the very top. The WAP200 is cabled to a router in the house via CAT5E that I ran through the basement in the house. Edit: I should mention the inside of this thing is a bunker. Even your cell phone signal will completely vanish. The bricks on the outside are just cosmetic, there's a cement silo behind the brickwork and a full layer of insulation.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2013 18:26
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:
I might add: *Are you using a wireless keyboard and mouse? Is it 2.4Ghz? *Do you have any other wireless devices that may be operating in the 2.4Ghz spectrum and causing channel collision? If he has a keyboard/mouse combo or other wireless hardware that's operating on the same channel as the router, it might knock out this wireless on boot.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2013 19:31
|
|
|
wide stance posted:Question about latency in high rise apartment/condo buildings: Your wireless is probably being raped by channel collision from other wireless networks. This will cause all sorts of fucky behaviour. A good way to deal with this, is to run some cat5e from one side of your appt to the other. Install a second Access Point or cheap router (DHCP server disabled on the second), and manually configure your 2.4Ghz channels to fall on channels 1, 6 or 11. Don't use the same channel on both devices. As you probably can't find a recommended channel (1,6,11) that isn't being used by neighbouring Access Points, you want to make yourself "The loudest voice in the room". This should improve your service significantly, and force your neighbours Access Points onto non-standard channels. Use inSSIDer to take a look at the other signals that may be interfering with your setup: http://www.metageek.net/support/downloads/
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2013 13:54
|
|
|
Three-Phase posted:I currently have a Wireless-G connection enabled on my router, it is WPA2-PSK with a reasonably strong password The chance of someone with enough skills and knowledge caring enough to try and crack your WPA2 encrypted network is pretty slim. If it's concerning, pick a long password that contains words you won't find in a dictionary. Switch it up once a month. If you are extra paranoid: - Enable AP isolation - Disable access to the configuration GUI over wireless - Disable access to the configuration GUI over the internet - Set your private IP range to something non-default. (Instead of 192.168.1.1 - Swap it to 172.16.1.1 or 10.255.1.1) - Check your DHCP table every now and then to verify you recognize the devices. Even if someone does get on, chances are they won't be smart enough to set a static IP. Restricting to MAC can only do so much. MAC's are pretty simple to spoof.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2013 02:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
Three-Phase posted:I'm too afraid that will break things, but I may consider that. It won't break anything. At most if you have some static IP's set on your network, you'll need to adjust the IP address for the device to work. If you're using DHCP, it won't matter as all the devices will just pick-up a new IP address within the new DHCP scope.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2013 13:16
|
|