Pre-n or not Pre-n, topology

[auto43348 at hushmail.com]

All the the scenarios involve at least three APs.  Since there is a 
farm there really isn't power inbetween the points for extra APs.  
Basicly I need to get connectivity out to two remote locations with 
hopefully wifi access to client devices at those locations in 
addition to wired ones.  Any fill coverage I can obtain inbetween 
is a bonus.
rearden

>Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 16:27:25 -0700
>From: Sean Jensen-Grey <seanj at xyke.com>
>Subject: Re: Pre-n or not Pre-n, topology
>To: SeattleWireless Development List <dev at seattlewireless.net>
>Message-ID: <20050907232725.GV26779 at xyke.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>I might be naive but couldn't you use 3 or 4 WRT54GS nodes in a 
>mesh back to a common endpoint? 
>
>Wouldn't that get you around obstacles and roaming? And the only 
>setup is that each AP can see 1 or more APs in the chain.
>
>Sean
>
>On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 02:35:49PM -0700, auto43348 at hushmail.com 
>wrote:
>> So is it better to use pre-n with stock antennas or 801.11b/g 
>with 
>> gain omni antennas?
>> 
>> It makes sense that any variant of beam forming would depend 
>upon 
>> antenna separation, polarization, feed line length, etc.  But 
>since 
>> the Linksys boxes don't use beam forming but just MIMO, then 
>> antenna placement may not be an issue.
>> 
>> I need to learn a bit about WDS, but with my application should 
>I 
>> use WDS or just put the remote APs in bridge mode?  It certainly 
>
>> would be nice to have some roaming capabilities between APs, but 
>
>> not necessary.
>> 
>> Does a configuration of:
>> point A with gain omni
>> point B with directional patch on ant 1 pointed at A and stock 
>omni 
>> on ant 2
>> point C with directional patch on ant 1 pointed at A and stock 
>omni 
>> on ant 2
>> 
>> B and C cannot see each other
>> A can see B anc C
>> 
>> What settings do I need to have for: client D to connect via B 
>> (outside of the directional antennas beam, so via the stock 
>ant2) 
>> to send traffic to client E via C or to access internet 
>connection 
>> fed by A.
>> 
>> Does this cause debillitating hidden node problems?
>> Could I plug in wired devices into point B and point C?
>> 
>> Would a better solution be to put two APs at each remote 
>location 
>> on different channels?  One to bridge to point A (backhaul) and 
>the 
>> other to provide wifi coverage a points B and C.  What is the 
>> marginal improvement?  it would double my AP cost.
>> 
>> Are there other better topologies?  two seperate APs at point A 
>> pointing at B and C (like sectors)?
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>> rearden
>> 
>> >   1. Re: Pre-n or not Pre-n (Franklin S Werren)
>> >   2. RE: Pre-n or not Pre-n (Casey Halverson)
>> >   3. Re: Pre-n or not Pre-n (Faisal Rahman)
>> >   4. RE: Pre-n or not Pre-n (Dan)
>> >   5. RE: Pre-n or not Pre-n (Robert Syputa)




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