On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:34:17 +0100, hlexa@hotmail.com (Axel
Hammerschmidt) wrote in <1houwni.1xh69001thqu04N%hlexa@hotmail.com>:

>John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> Instead of a simple repeater you can use a wireless Ethernet bridge
>> (that can support enough clients) cabled to a wireless access point on a
>> different non-overlapping channel; i.e.,
>
>What sort of router are you assuming the Wi-Fi Router is? This router
>(which the OP already has) will have to share bandwidth amongst stations
>connecting directly with this router as well as the bridge.

Of course. But a simple repeater only makes things (much) worse by
cutting the available wireless bandwidth in half. With a remote access
point on a different non-overlapping channel, full Wi-Fi bandwidth is
preserved.

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>