Improve 5GHZ range buying new router?

[Tiz]

@GW2 Hey I'm here for the same reason, I don't want to win any argument, is just that I wasn't understanding what he was saying, like the article explained exactly that feature, that the APs were ready to drop the connection and etc. I'm sure @skywake was doing his best intentions, maybe we are all dumb and we didn't understand! Which at the end of the day is good, because that means the solution is even more simple o cheaper than expected!

 

In any case, again, thank you all again.

[Donut417]

57 minutes ago, GW2 said:

It's because the APs are not aware of each other, I don't want to be rude or anything because I'm far from a network expert, but I really don't think Skywake knows what he's talking about in this situation (I'm sorry Skywake, I'm poor at phrasing things nicely). Maybe that works if you buy devices which are ONLY WAPs (like the unifi) but two router/WAP combos will not play nice together like that.

 

@skywake

I beg of you! Please make me look like an idiot for my harsh words. If this is as possible as you say I'd really love to get it working in that way with two routers, even just as an experiment.

The issue is their are 3 separate standards for roaming between AP's. I kinda read up on them, and it seems each has pluses and minuses. Like you said, you need to use AP's not router, unfortunately most people dont know the difference. In order to do roaming you generally you need the exact same AP's to make them work. When you buy a router, your not exactly sure what AP could be built in, which causes a issue. Also, when it comes to the Ubiquiti products there is a software component that has to be installed on a network connected machine, which helps with hand off. 

 

As far as the mesh solutions go. From what I read up on the Google solution it has 1x 2.4 Ghz radio and 2x 5Ghz radios. One of the 5 Ghz radios is used for wireless communication between the main unit, connect to the modem (acting as a router) and the other units acting as extenders. This solution is a shit ton better than a normal wireless range extender because range extenders tend to share a radio between devices and connecting to the router. 

 

 

[skywake]

2 hours ago, GW2 said:

It's because the APs are not aware of each other, I don't want to be rude or anything because I'm far from a network expert, but I really don't think Skywake knows what he's talking about in this situation (I'm sorry Skywake, I'm poor at phrasing things nicely). Maybe that works if you buy devices which are ONLY WAPs (like the unifi) but two router/WAP combos will not play nice together like that.

 

2 hours ago, Tiz said:

@GW2 Hey I'm here for the same reason, I don't want to win any argument, is just that I wasn't understanding what he was saying, like the article explained exactly that feature, that the APs were ready to drop the connection and etc. I'm sure @skywake was doing his best intentions, maybe we are all dumb and we didn't understand! Which at the end of the day is good, because that means the solution is even more simple o cheaper than expected!

To be blunt, there isn't technically any difference between the WiFi from a router and the WiFi from an access point. It really is much simpler than all of the marketing buzz words make it out to be. You have a single radio with an associated SSID/PW which is one BSS. Clients will tend not to move from one BSS to another because re-authorising and possibly obtaining a new IP is a (time) expensive process. You can however also have an ESS where there are multiple radios with the same SSID/PW on the same network. Clients will more happily move from one AP to another if they are within the same ESS because they know they can use the same key and the same IP. That's just how it works.

 

Now the reason why people are disagreeing with me here I think is pretty simple. I'm not wrong because the above is exactly how things should work. The issue is that consumer WiFi is garbage. Usually when people setup a second AP in this way they're doing it to be a quick and cheap solution. Often because they're not happy with how their current setup is performing. Which usually means they're grabbing an old router they don't use anymore and pairing it with their current router they're not happy with. When you throw two pieces of garbage together why is it a surprise that it doesn't work well.

 

Speaking from my own experience? I had a setup that used a Netgear N600 router/AP combo unit and a DLink AC1200 AP for quite a while. It worked fine and clients happily roamed between APs. For almost a year. Happy with the setup I got a second slightly different SKU DLink AC1200 because I wanted AC wireless throughout the house. Again, it worked fine and clients happily roamed between APs. For a few months. Then the first APs died, partially, which was a pain to diagnose. At that point I replaced the faulty AP with a Ubiquiti AC Lite and it worked perfectly again for a good year or more combined with the DLink AP. The only reason I have two AC Lites now is because I wanted all my WiFi usage to be captured in the statistics.

 

Do I recommend Ubiquiti? Yes. 100%. They're great and I've had far less issues with them than the consumer grade WiFi you usually get. But be an informed consumer and don't buy into all of the hype. Zero Handoff is not something you're going to use and mesh generally isn't something that home users should get excited about. Ubiquiti's APs are good because they work well and faults are regularly patched. The ability for clients to roam happily between them isn't something unique to a full Ubiquiti setup. If you can run Ethernet through your house and have a couple of AC Pros at either end do it because that'll be a fantastic setup. But if you're on a budget and happy with your current router? Buy a single AC Pro, there's a fair chance it'll behave nicely with your router.

 

1 hour ago, Donut417 said:

As far as the mesh solutions go. From what I read up on the Google solution it has 1x 2.4 Ghz radio and 2x 5Ghz radios. One of the 5 Ghz radios is used for wireless communication between the main unit, connect to the modem (acting as a router) and the other units acting as extenders. This solution is a shit ton better than a normal wireless range extender because range extenders tend to share a radio between devices and connecting to the router. 

Not all mesh solutions use multiple radios and some range extenders use multiple radios. It's a reason why these mesh branded solutions are better than the range extenders people often buy. But it's not technically a difference as a result of it being mesh. For example Sonos uses a mesh network for its wireless speakers. It makes sense for them because audio is super low bandwidth and in the case of multi-room audio each node is probably a speaker which also needs the data. Each speaker only has a 2.4Ghz radio. Plug a cable into the speaker at the end of the run and you'll get <10Mbps. So as I think I said earlier, mesh has its uses but for home WiFi? Mesh is no different to a range extender.

 

1 hour ago, Donut417 said:

The issue is their are 3 separate standards for roaming between AP's. I kinda read up on them, and it seems each has pluses and minuses. Like you said, you need to use AP's not router, unfortunately most people dont know the difference. In order to do roaming you generally you need the exact same AP's to make them work. When you buy a router, your not exactly sure what AP could be built in, which causes a issue. Also, when it comes to the Ubiquiti products there is a software component that has to be installed on a network connected machine, which helps with hand off. 

My understanding is that those are standards for moving between different BSS. The idea is that the client can be given a list of WLANs on the same network and can obtain the key for a different SSID/PW from a server while remaining connected. If you are within the same ESS you already have the right key. And in any case Ubiquiti hasn't implemented 802.11k/r yet so if you're having good luck with roaming on Ubiquiti it's as simple as it all being on the same ESS.

 

Also you don't need to have a controller running 24/7 for Ubiquiti's gear. You need it for some of the more advanced features like the guest portal. If they were to implement some of those roaming standards you mentioned you'd probably need the controller running. Zero-Handoff needed the controller to work. But if you are doing a basic setup they work fine without the controller.

[Mikensan]

Sorry to dig up an old thread, was looking for people using ubiquiti hardware (how's that going @Tiz?).

 

I think part of the confusion is CFstorm recommends their mesh hardware but then suggests connecting it via ethernet back to a switch. While this has its use cases like being used as an outdoor AP, the "mesh" technology this offers is null once you connect it via ethernet. These are meant to spot-cover areas and create "hops" for outdoor coverage. It's not going to solve or enhance wifi connectivity (devices not switching between APs). 

 

Thinking maybe there's too much crossover of signal between the two wireless routers/APs and your device(s) don't feel the need to switch. Any large indoor building you've been in that had full wifi coverage that you've used, are using APs. 

 

Anywho since it's been almost a month, was curious what the results were :-). I just ordered the AC-Pro, finally moving away from N.

[CFstorm]

On 7/3/2017 at 5:29 AM, jj9987 said:

You can set two access points with same SSID, encryption and password and the devices will connect to either one just fine.

Hmm...

[CFstorm]

On 7/3/2017 at 5:26 AM, Tiz said:

Hello everyone. I'll try to be concise.

 

My current router is TP-Link AC1750 Archer C7

I try to cover 2 floors, but in the farthest points of the floors the 5ghz drops horribly. My question is if does anybody knows if a better router like ASUS RT-AC5300 would improve range of the 5ghz network?

 

Thanks!

 

P.D. Yes, I know about access point and all that, but I need the same access point for everyone so... 1 router only. Also yes, my router is already in the middle of the stairs for maximum reach of both floors.

Try Looking at Cisco Meraki. I use them for everything. 

[Tiz]

3 hours ago, Mikensan said:

Sorry to dig up an old thread, was looking for people using ubiquiti hardware (how's that going @Tiz?).

 

I think part of the confusion is CFstorm recommends their mesh hardware but then suggests connecting it via ethernet back to a switch. While this has its use cases like being used as an outdoor AP, the "mesh" technology this offers is null once you connect it via ethernet. These are meant to spot-cover areas and create "hops" for outdoor coverage. It's not going to solve or enhance wifi connectivity (devices not switching between APs). 

 

Thinking maybe there's too much crossover of signal between the two wireless routers/APs and your device(s) don't feel the need to switch. Any large indoor building you've been in that had full wifi coverage that you've used, are using APs. 

 

Anywho since it's been almost a month, was curious what the results were :-). I just ordered the AC-Pro, finally moving away from N.

I haven't ordered them yet, if you want it'd be cool if you comment about your experience, I'll probably get on to them in the next few weeks.

[Tiz]

1 hour ago, CFstorm said:

Try Looking at Cisco Meraki. I use them for everything. 

Hmm, not sure if that's for me. Seems overkill and also not exactly what I want. Your first suggestion, the Ubiquiti points, seems more fit for me. 

[CFstorm]

On 7/21/2017 at 4:03 PM, Tiz said:

Hmm, not sure if that's for me. Seems overkill and also not exactly what I want. Your first suggestion, the Ubiquiti points, seems more fit for me. 

Yeah, the ubiquity points are good. I would recommend them as well.

[CFstorm]

On 7/21/2017 at 0:29 PM, Mikensan said:

Sorry to dig up an old thread, was looking for people using ubiquiti hardware (how's that going @Tiz?).

 

I think part of the confusion is CFstorm recommends their mesh hardware but then suggests connecting it via ethernet back to a switch. While this has its use cases like being used as an outdoor AP, the "mesh" technology this offers is null once you connect it via ethernet. These are meant to spot-cover areas and create "hops" for outdoor coverage. It's not going to solve or enhance wifi connectivity (devices not switching between APs). 

 

Thinking maybe there's too much crossover of signal between the two wireless routers/APs and your device(s) don't feel the need to switch. Any large indoor building you've been in that had full wifi coverage that you've used, are using APs. 

 

Anywho since it's been almost a month, was curious what the results were :-). I just ordered the AC-Pro, finally moving away from N.

What I meant by having them hard wired was that each AP would give you the same speed whereas a "repeater" (the kind were it wirelessly connects to your router and broadcasts another wireless connection) is much slower on the second node.

[Mikensan]

On 7/23/2017 at 11:14 AM, CFstorm said:

What I meant by having them hard wired was that each AP would give you the same speed whereas a "repeater" (the kind were it wirelessly connects to your router and broadcasts another wireless connection) is much slower on the second node.

That's what I was thinking what you meant, so instead he could just buy the Pros since he wouldn't be using the mesh/repeater feature.

 

I just got my AC PRO, and it's worth noting I'm going from Wireless N to AC, and noticed a speed difference being only 10-15 feet away. I haven't done any LAN testing yet, but with AC I'm able to max out my 150mbit/s WAN whereas with N I hovered around 80-90. I'll do some further testing tonight. I only bought one, so I can't speak on getting them to work together. However I can test the seamless crossover between the ubqiuiti and my ASUS RT-N66U (well respected N router).

 

Anything you want me to test/do just let me know.

[NZLaurence]

On 04/07/2017 at 6:27 AM, skywake said:

Let me brake it down a bit because there are very specific things being said in those videos and the article. Again, definitions....

 

BSS -> Single AP + Clients
ESS -> Multiple APs with same SSID/PW

 

The video Linus did and the article talk about Zero Handoff feature which is a way to effectively have multiple APs behave as a single BSS. But in both cases they didn't actually use the feature. To be blunt Zero Handoff isn't worth the effort because with a decent clients will happily roam between APs within the same ESS. What they are impressed about in both cases was the quality of Ubiquiti's gear in comparison to the WiFi you usually get from TPLink, Asus, Netgear or DLink. In other words they got better APs and instead of using the feature designed to improve roaming they....

 

The video I linked to talks about mesh which is an entirely different thing again. As far as your device is concerned a mesh network is just a bunch of APs under the same ESS. Better roaming doesn't even come into it with a mesh setup. A mesh setup is simply designed to be an alternative to physically wiring up your APs. Is it a good alternative? Well no. A mesh setup, especially for small setups, runs into the same problems that repeaters do. The only reason it exists is because 1. people buy them and 2. there are some (niche) cases where it's the only option. Mesh is best for when you want decent and stable coverage fast and don't particularly care about performance. Those WiFi speakers use that sort of setup for that very reason.

Do I like Ubiquiti APs? Yes. Do I think that mesh and zero handoff are worth the hype? No. If you want a good and fast WiFi setup you should do three things. Run Ethernet to all the APs you have, have the right number of access points set to the same SSID/PW and try to avoid using WiFi when possible.

This isn't quite right, in a proper roaming environment you will have the AP's talking to each other to compare client connection strength and speed as well as interference. The AP's will then control the hand off between themselves to make sure that the client is always connected to the best ap. Good AP's will even steer the clients between bands (5/2.4) and channels based on client capacity and maximum speeds.

 

A mesh type network works the other way and provides a dumb services and expects the clients to know which one to connect to and when to switch. As different clients have different settings this can result in a client staying pined to a ap that is less ideal and slowing down that ap.

 

If speed is paramount, look at something like a pair of Aerohives or Ruckus devices. The best I have seen is about 600 clients connected to one network of 3xAPs in one huge room. Throughput was about 1.6gb per ap. They were dynamicly moving the low bandwidth clients to 2.4ghz to leave the 5ghz for high bandwidth clients. The monitoring graphs were awesome.

[Tiz]

6 hours ago, NZLaurence said:

This isn't quite right, in a proper roaming environment you will have the AP's talking to each other to compare client connection strength and speed as well as interference. The AP's will then control the hand off between themselves to make sure that the client is always connected to the best ap. Good AP's will even steer the clients between bands (5/2.4) and channels based on client capacity and maximum speeds.

 

A mesh type network works the other way and provides a dumb services and expects the clients to know which one to connect to and when to switch. As different clients have different settings this can result in a client staying pined to a ap that is less ideal and slowing down that ap.

 

If speed is paramount, look at something like a pair of Aerohives or Ruckus devices. The best I have seen is about 600 clients connected to one network of 3xAPs in one huge room. Throughput was about 1.6gb per ap. They were dynamicly moving the low bandwidth clients to 2.4ghz to leave the 5ghz for high bandwidth clients. The monitoring graphs were awesome.

Very informative, thanks! I don't have so many clients, so I'll be fine with Ubiquiti, basically what I want is the AP to decide to drop the client or not and high 5ghz speeds, so I think te AC PRO from Ubiquiti is my best bet.

[skywake]

On 25/07/2017 at 7:36 AM, NZLaurence said:

This isn't quite right, in a proper roaming environment you will have the AP's talking to each other to compare client connection strength and speed as well as interference. The AP's will then control the hand off between themselves to make sure that the client is always connected to the best ap. Good AP's will even steer the clients between bands (5/2.4) and channels based on client capacity and maximum speeds.

I never said otherwise. All I said was that mesh doesn't really factor into better roaming for clients. All you need for clients to roam between APs is for them to be on the same ESS (i.e. SSID/PW). Yes there are some more advanced features like band-steering and load balancing with a centralised controller. But for home use there aren't many devices so a "just connect to the best signal" setup works well enough. And in any case if you did have a super dense environment where things like load balancing became worthwhile? Having wired AP (i.e. not mesh) should be your first priority.

 

Basically the advice that the OP should buy a bunch of mesh APs was literally the worst advice they could have been given.

[Tiz]

2 hours ago, skywake said:

I never said otherwise. All I said was that mesh doesn't really factor into better roaming for clients. All you need for clients to roam between APs is for them to be on the same ESS (i.e. SSID/PW). Yes there are some more advanced features like band-steering and load balancing with a centralised controller. But for home use there aren't many devices so a "just connect to the best signal" setup works well enough. And in any case if you did have a super dense environment where things like load balancing became worthwhile? Having wired AP (i.e. not mesh) should be your first priority.

 

Basically the advice that the OP should buy a bunch of mesh APs was literally the worst advice they could have been given.

Ok. So what's your advice for a person that wants to move the laptop around a big house and still have really strong 5ghz signal?

[skywake]

2 hours ago, Tiz said:

Ok. So what's your advice for a person that wants to move the laptop around a big house and still have really strong 5ghz signal?

For a home environment if you're going to jump into Ubiquiti gear.....

 

These products are well suited to what you want to do:

- UAP-AC-Lite

- UAP-AC-Pro

 

These products are amazing but not worth the extra spend for home use:

- Anything AirMax, if you don't know you need it you don't need it

- UAP-AC-HD, only worth it for super dense deployments

 

These products cost more for virtually zero even theoretical benefit:

- UAP-AC-M (what CFstorm was directing you towards)

- UAP-AC-M-Pro

- Anything Amplifi

- UAP-AC-LR (it's not bad but if you want more than the Lite buy the Pro not the LR)

[Tiz]

Hello everyone, I no longer hang around here but I said I'd post about how it went, and I always hate those people that ask for help, then say he/she will update with the result and that's the end of it!

TLDR: They work great, problem solved.

 

So, I bought 2 Ubiquiti AC Pro, each one for one floor of my house. They're amazing, and I can go upstairs and never notice any cuts or erratic behaviour, it's been around 3 months like this, so I'm happy I listened to the ones recommending me Ubiquiti, and I think they were the only ones truly understanding my problem. I only regret 1 thing... not buying the HD version instead of the Pro. Basically the HD version uses Wave 2, which my Razer Blade and my wife's Dell XPS both use, which would be around 85MB/s instead of 45MB/s that we get now.

 

Thanks again to the people that recommended me the AC Pro, only a shame I didn't go for the HD version!