Pre-n or not Pre-n

[Robert Syputa]

That not only messs with the beam forming but also the signal 
differentiation and timing for signal processing.  It might b e posible to 
play around with the antennas but without understanding the intricate 
details the most likely outcome would be to degrade performance.  Perhaps 
using a parabolic reflector to concetrate signals but without effecting the 
antenna directly would work.. but it might not.

ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°`°¤ø,

Robert Syputa




>From: "Casey Halverson" <casey.halverson at infospace.com>
>Reply-To: SeattleWireless Development List <dev at seattlewireless.net>
>To: "SeattleWireless Development List" <dev at seattlewireless.net>
>Subject: RE: Pre-n or not Pre-n
>Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 14:40:48 -0700
>
>FYI,
>
>Removing, adding, or modifying antennas with pre-n/n hardware is a bad
>idea.
>
>Beam forming is only possible by properly spaced antennas.  Putting two
>random antennas at different phases with different lengths of coax is
>asking for trouble.
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev-bounces at seattlewireless.net
> > [mailto:dev-bounces at seattlewireless.net] On Behalf Of
> > auto43348 at hushmail.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 7:09 AM
> > To: dev at seattlewireless.net
> > Subject: Pre-n or not Pre-n
> >
> > I need to wifi a 110 acre hilly farm to provide access to two
> > other sites several hundred yards apart which cannot see each
> > other. (A can see B and C, but B and C cannot see each other)
> >  Some foilage is obstructing the view from A to B and C, but
> > using a patch antenna and gain omni a low speed connection
> > was made during a test.  They currently have one WRT54G and a
> > 10db FAB omni.
> >
> > Do you get any benefit from pre-n equipment when only the AP
> > is pre- n and the clients are 801.11g/b?  Assuming you do,
> > which of the following systems would work better (or make one
> > up yourself)?
> >
> > 1. Put a WRT54GX pre-n AP at point A (are the antennas removable?
> > It doesn't seem so), put a WRT54G with highest gain patch
> > antenna I can find at points B and C.
> >
> > 2. Put a WRT54G(S) at all three locations.  Put high gain
> > omni at point A and high gain patches at points B and C.
> >
> > Cost is a factor.  The network needs to be reliable and able
> > to run voip and hopefully a webcam.  I would like to mesh or
> > run WDS to provide general coverage over the area as much as
> > possible, but that is more of a side effect.  Providing
> > access to the two remote locations is the primary purpose.  I
> > picked the linksys boxes was because they are hackable,
> > inexpensive and I already have a few.
> >
> > Suggestions?
> >
> >
> >
> > Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get secure
> > FREE email: http://www.hushmail.com/?l=2
> >
> > Free, ultra-private instant messaging with Hush Messenger
> > http://www.hushmail.com/services-messenger?l=434
> >
> > Promote security and make money with the Hushmail Affiliate Program:
> > http://www.hushmail.com/about-affiliate?l=427
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dev mailing list
> > Dev at seattlewireless.net
> > http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/dev
> >
>_______________________________________________
>Dev mailing list
>Dev at seattlewireless.net
>http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/dev