On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 00:18:50 -0600, "ps56k"
<pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote:
>Have we been told what the expected broadband connection is ?
>aka - a 1meg DSL line ?
Nope. However, we do know that there's CATV in the park. It would
seem possible that it's a faster cable modem. It would be interesting
to know the TOS (terms of service) for the backhaul.
Lots of other detail is missing, such as how is this going to be
administrated, bandwidth management, login/passwd?, logging, abuse
detection, abuse mitigation, etc. Basically, running an RV campground
wireless, with up to 100 connections, is almost exactly like running a
wired ISP, with the added bonus of a marginally reliable method of
delivery. I've covered this several times in the distant past, so a
Google search should find the details.
>On Jan 24, 6:52*pm, Stephen <stephen_h...@xyzworld.com> wrote:
>> Nope - 802.11 b / g *use 2.4, a uses 5 GHz. "n" can use 2.4 and 5, but
>> that is not mandatory in the standard.
>
> And that only supports exactly what I said. The AP point should
>support 802.11 B G and N. There are zero reasons for not doing so.
>The additional frequencies are just some of the many reasons why the
>AP should also support N. Any reputable manufacturer will include
>separate transceivers for both frequencies.
>
which is fine. So the advice now is not "go and buy n compatible
hardware" but "go and buy n compatible, with support for both 2.4 and
5 GHz, and with dual radios" so both run simultaneously.
anyhow - Jeff does this for a living so has answers based on more
experience than i do.
The more general point i wanted to make is about "latest spec" does
not automatically translate into "better for the job" - you should
really see what the flip side might be before deciding.
the bit we have all ignored is that "n" hardware right now means at
least 1 mandatory upgrade - so if the box is up a pole it needs to be
easy to do that without physical access.
> Backward compatitiblity, etc are all irrelevent to the OP since that
>happens automatically with 802.11 N hardware. OP's AP should support
>802.11 N.
my experience has been that backward compatibility even within a
single manufacturers range is not a given (where they have a fighting
chance of understanding how all the tin works).
This happens even with "professional" networking tin, and without
wireless being involved..
So i get a bit sketical about testing for a standard that isnt
published yet.
All that worry about future compatibility is, well, how
>many times is hardware out there and working just fine both before and
>after the standard's final version is released? USB, Firewall,
>Bluetooth, Zigbee... we've been through this too many times without
>problems. Just get the AP point that supports 802.11 N from a
>reputable manufacturer. Not cheapest hardware sold by tigerdirect.
>802.11 N hardware increases reliability now and in the future. And
>eliminates potential problems that need not even be discussed here.
>
> Meanwhile, prewire other locations for additional APs should
>reliability make them necessary. Best is a dedicated AP connection
>each back to the central router. One AP now. More installed as
>experience proves the need.
Agree here - wire up the place where you can.
Ducts if possible so if you need something different you can pull new
cable types.
--
Regards
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 17:37:18 GMT, Stephen <stephen_hope@xyzworld.com>
wrote:
>anyhow - Jeff does this for a living so has answers based on more
>experience than i do.
Yeah, something like that. Actually, I get most of answers from many
years of experience doing everything from RF design to supporting
installed systems. The problem is that I only see the systems that do
NOT work. I'm sure there are wireless systems out there which are
installed, work out of the box, do everything expected, never needs an
upgrade, and never does anything unusual. These may exist, but I
never get to see them. Everything I see is presumed to be broken or
defective.
Time for a rant. My opinion of 802.11n is far from complimentary.
I'll skim the highlights and leave out the politics (for now):
1. The standard mixes spatial diversity and beam forming
technologies, which are two radically different technologies. In many
cases, the customer doesn't have a clue which they need or are using.
Some even do both:
<http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/wireless/ps5678/ps10092/white_paper_c11-516389.html>
<http://www.theruckusroom.net/2009/01/cisco-validates-smart-wifi.html>
The problem is that spatial diversity requires a compatible 802.11n
client radio. Beam forming will work with anything.
2. Most of the customers that have 802.11n router eventually have me
disable the spatial diversity feature and just use it for 802.11g.
That's because at any distance beyond a room or office, the 802.11n
error rate is so high, that the router reverts back to 802.11g speeds.
You can watch it happen by monitor the client connection speed.
3. 802.11n is all about speed, not range. However, that won't stop
companies from publishing irreproducible test results and graphs
showing the 802.11n does increase range. For example:
<http://www.xirrus.com/pdfs/Tutorial_802.11n.pdf>
on Pg 8 shows a graph of range versus rate for a/b/g/n. It would
appear that at long range, "n" still works. However, that's not the
way it works or is shipped. What happens is that when the error rate
drops below the threshold where the retransmissions slow the
connection down to below 802.11g speeds, the access point just
switches to 802.11g and disables "n". The graph shows the connection
speed, not the actual thrupt. The lack of speed units of measure
should be an obvious clue. Xirrus even dumped the graph in their
tutorial on wireless range at:
<http://www.xirrus.com/pdfs/Tutorial_Range.pdf>
<http://www.xirrus.com/library/>
Despite this issue, the Xirrus tutorials, wall charges, and webinars
are well worth reading. The product is also very interesting, but is
far too expensive for my typical customers.
4. 802.11n is a win in one respect. It minimizes the air time used
to move a given amount of data. Therefore, more users can share the
same air time. The faster the traffic moves through the air, the more
users a system can handle. Visualize a coffee shop with one user
stuck on 1Mbits/sec 802.11b. In the same time that this user takes to
download some amount of data, a 54Mbit/sec 802.11g connection can
download 54 times as much. With 802.11n, possibly 300 times as much.
5. Outdoor use of the spatial diversity type of 802.11n is a waste of
time. That's because the distances involved make the possibility of
using reflections to improve speed somewhat dubious. Spatial
diversity bonds multiple streams, with different propagation times.
You'll find those in the typical highly reflective indoor environment,
but not so much outdoors.
However, beam forming type of 802.11n should work nicely outdoors. If
there's a nearby source of interference, the access point will put a
big hole in the antenna pattern and effectively prevent the
interference from becoming a problem. At the same time, it increases
the gain in the direction of desired client radios. For an
interference infested RF environment, beam forming is a good thing.
Too bad some can't tell the difference between an incident and
reflected signal to eliminate multipath. Also, too bad the antenna
has to be a PCB phased or switched array inside the access point. One
could install the entire access point on top of a pole, but few
commodity routers a made for this. In addition, since external
antennas are both forbidden and don't work anyway, it's not possible
to customize the antenna pattern by using sector or directional
antennas. However, there are beam steering outdoor routers and
antenna systems (who's names I can't seem to find).
6. The lack of an external antenna connector in all 802.11n is what
kills 802.11n for me in many applications. I often have to install a
panel or sector antenna in an office up high to customize the
coverage.
"Peter Pan" <PeterPanNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.info> wrote in
news:V4ydnR2k3s-_Z-TUnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@earthlink.com:
> I'm curious, not an in stock/out of stock question.... That one is 600
> mw, twice the legal max (here in the us) who sell's a 600 mw unit
> legally?
Well, it's not *really* 600 mw. And the built-in antenna is only 10 dBi.
On Jan 24, 10:47*pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> Permit me to supply a reason for not doing so. *Enabling 802.11n modes
> disables the 802.11b mode. *That's because of the huge amount to time
> required to aquire (long preamble) an 802.11b packet.
Meanwhile, that was a type of problem seen by the many who bought
the AP from tigerdirect - who buy based on price like a beancounter
rather than value like an engineeer. The better 802.11 APs even have
a 2.4 Ghz transceiver for 802.11 B/G and a separate transceiver for
the 5 Ghz 802.11 N.
Meanwhile, one AP installed now. Wiring for additional units in
other locations as experience teaches what does work better (location
and AP manufacturer) and what is needed for those customers and their
reception.
If 802.11 B/G/N wireless worked as some stated, well, that would be
how a tigerdirect AP gets sold so cheap and at high profit.
Laptops are made in China. So all laptops are aslo crap? That is
the reasoning? It is not who assembles it. It is who sets the
standards. Even Cisco routers - the backbone of the Internet - are
made in China. But Cisco, Dell, HP, etc define standards. Those
standards make the difference between a cheap tigerdirect AP point
verses the useful one from Netgear.
Get one 802.11 B/G.N AP from a reputable manufacturer - and don't
even look back at all the naysaying in this thread.
Meanwhile, what is necessary for lightning protection and exterior
grade cables were discussed elsewhere.
If the campground owner is concerned with a trivial four inch wide
cut across the roadway (where multiple pipes are buried for this
cabling and future purposes), then he really did not want this anyway.
>On Jan 24, 10:47*pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>> Permit me to supply a reason for not doing so. *Enabling 802.11n modes
>> disables the 802.11b mode. *That's because of the huge amount to time
>> required to aquire (long preamble) an 802.11b packet.
>
> Meanwhile, that was a type of problem seen by the many who bought
>the AP
Perhaps I wasn't too clear. All 802.11n access points disable 802.11b
compatibility when in the 802.11n 40Mhz mode. Some also disable WEP
encryption (finally) as it's NOT part of the 802.11n spec. These are
not a "problem" peculiar to any manufactory or vendor. They all do
it. I don't have a copy of the 802.11n spec, but this kinda hints at
what's happening:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/802.11n#Backward_compatibility>
If you need specifics, I'll dig them out later.
>from tigerdirect - who buy based on price like a beancounter
>rather than value like an engineeer.
I are an engineer and I buy from Tiger Direct. Over the years, I've
seen good deals and absolute junk mixed together in the nifty catalog.
My main complaints about Tiger Direct are over the non-functional
rebate program and their amazing inability to properly pack the
shipping box without having it explode on arrival.
>The better 802.11 APs even have
>a 2.4 Ghz transceiver for 802.11 B/G and a separate transceiver for
>the 5 Ghz 802.11 N.
Pardon my ignorance, buy why does having a seperate 5.8GHz radio make
the access point "better"? Certainly, it adds a useful feature.
However, most dual band clients don't offer any way to differentiate a
connection between bands. Some don't even indicate which band they're
operating upon. Netstumbler and other diagnostics can't tell the
difference between bands. Some access points stupidly force the same
SSID on both bands making selection by SSID impossible. DD-WRT and
other 3rd party firmware barely works on dual band wireless routers.
Wi-Fi finders are all 2.4GHz. One laptop with a dual band radio
arrived with 5.8Ghz disabled to save battery power. How does having
5.8GHz make a a wireless access point "better"?
>Meanwhile, one AP installed now. Wiring for additional units in
>other locations as experience teaches what does work better (location
>and AP manufacturer) and what is needed for those customers and their
>reception.
I hope I'm not reading this incorrectly, but if you've only installed
this one access point, you're about to have a serious adventure in the
reality of wireless. I've lost count of how many I've sold,
installed, setup, fixed, tweaked, and otherwise done battle with. If
you include client bridges, point to point links, and mfg test
fixtures, I would guess several hundred. What's scary is that no two
are the same. I could transplant a working system, from one location
to another, and get compeletely different performance and reliability.
You may discover what works better by experience, but there's no
guarantee that this experience is universal or even portable. Best of
luck.
>If 802.11 B/G/N wireless worked as some stated, well, that would be
>how a tigerdirect AP gets sold so cheap and at high profit.
Sorry, but I don't understand what you're claiming. Tiger Direct
sells fairly current model units from a variety of manufacturers. They
do tend to sell the absolute cheapest, but at least they stick with
fairly well known brands. They also sell refurbished units and
closeouts, which are clearly marked as such. I've bought some of
these with rather mixed results.
The major determination in final cost of a commodity access point is
sales volume. That's why wireless access points sell for MORE than
wireless routers, even though wireless routers have more hardware and
more complex development. That's also why wireless game adapters sell
for more than both, as the volume just isn't there.
>Laptops are made in China. So all laptops are aslo crap?
Well actually they are all crap. I also fix laptops. When I get rid
of the common cold and drag myself back to my palatial office, I'll
post a photo of the rather large number of unrepairable laptops I've
been accumulating. Most are failures due to crappy soldering of the
BGA (ball grid array) chips. Others fail due to overstressed parts,
bad mechanical design, and just plain junk parts. The all too common
low-ESR electrolytics with the counterfeit electrolyte is still a
problem after about 6 years:
<http://www.badcaps.net>
I don't have time to itemize all the chronic failures that I've seen.
Let me assure you that most of these failures could have been averted
if the laptops were properly designed, used quality components, didn't
cut corners, and were a bit more rugged.
>That is
>the reasoning?
I could ask you the same question as to why you decided that since all
laptops were made in China, that they were all crap. What I said was
that most of the major commodity router manufacturers buy from
contract manufacturers in China, Taiwan, Korea, and Japan. They do
not manufacture the guts. The vendors change constantly, sometimes
without changing the model number. Unfortuantely, quality and
reliability vary with these vendors and designs. In order for someone
to determine if a specific product is of reasonable quality, one has
to know something about what's inside the plastic box. Is that
sufficiently clear?
>It is not who assembles it. It is who sets the
>standards.
What standards? For quality? ISO-9000 and such offer a documentation
trail so that if anything goes wrong, the appropriate culprit can be
blamed. Got any better standards for insuring you get a quality
wireless product? Certifications?
>Even Cisco routers - the backbone of the Internet - are
>made in China. But Cisco, Dell, HP, etc define standards. Those
>standards make the difference between a cheap tigerdirect AP point
>verses the useful one from Netgear.
I guess you haven't seen all the counterfeit Cisco modules and
products:
<http://www.andovercg.com/services/cisco-counterfeit-wic-1dsu-t1.shtml>
<http://www.coastnetwork.com/counterfeitcisco.html>
I bought some nifty HP print server cards on eBay, that lasted about a
month before they blew. They were counterfiet. The problem is that
all this stuff is made in the same factories, by the same people, on
the same production line, with the same parts, using the same
specifications. The only difference is that little of it is ever
tested or burned in. Sometimes, known defective parts are used. The
giveaway is that if the factory runs out of parts, they tend to
substitute something cheaper. You can see that in the above URL's. If
you haven't run into this problem yet, consider yourself lucky. It's
an expensive mess. Anyway, a better set of specs isn't going to help
much. Destroying the over-runs and failures will help.
>Get one 802.11 B/G.N AP from a reputable manufacturer - and don't
>even look back at all the naysaying in this thread.
I agree. One good wireless router, from whatever constitutes a
reputable manufacturer, is a very cheap object lesson in wireless
reality. The experience gained in deployment and troubleshooting
should compensate for the lack of expertise, experience, and planning.
Those can be obtained later in order to patch up the system. I'm
serious. Deploy an 802.11n solution and see if it does what you want
and if it's worth the money. You'll learn more from the experience
than from reading my rants and understanding the naysayers.
>Meanwhile, what is necessary for lightning protection and exterior
>grade cables were discussed elsewhere.
Nope. No external antennas allowed (or will work) with most 802.11n
access points. You don't need a lightning arrestor if there's no
exposed antenna. Maybe an arrestor on the power line entry and LAN
cable backhaul.
>If the campground owner is concerned with a trivial four inch wide
>cut across the roadway (where multiple pipes are buried for this
>cabling and future purposes), then he really did not want this anyway.
Nobody does road cuts these days. Too messy and too much work. About
$250. See:
<http://www.borit.com>
The video clip demo is worth watching if you're planning on doing
horizontal drilling (to avoid trenching).
On Jan 24, 8:33*pm, west...@gmail.com wrote:
>>*The AP point should
> support 802.11 B G and N. *There are zero reasons for not doing so.
Ahem. I have a huge one. N is an indoor home user solution. As far
as I can tell, they aren't made and don't work for outdoor
applications. How many pro outdoor CPE panels can you find that use
N? None or close to none. How many wireless ISPs are using N? How
many N AP/Routers have external antenna connectors for a sector or
panel antenna, a grid antenna. None?
So, if you are willing to go with A or G, you can get one of those
inexpensive outdoor CPE/AP devices for under $100 and concentrate on
getting the signal out there to your users. Also can use coax
antenna cable, also can use a rootenna style box. All three are the
kind of solutions a wireless ISP is going to need. Antennas can be
chosen to meet the needs of the location.
They do not need the N speeds for internet and you can't provide it
anyway. A is good, but how many have an adapter for A on their
laptop. I do, but many don't. G is the answer, move on to how to do
the backhaul and where to place the antennas.
> * Meanwhile, prewire other locations for additional APs should
> reliability make them necessary. *Best is a dedicated AP connection
> each back to the central router. *One AP now. *More installed as
> experience proves the need.
Agreed, though I'd be thinking of the second and third already.
Trying to use one antenna to do it all may cause you to compromise the
coverage for the area that first antenna can do well. Might even
consider two directional antennas at the club house each pointing in
different directions. Then run one cable or try powerline as backhaul
for an outdoor AP further down the line.
> Meanwhile, that was a type of problem seen by the many who bought
>the AP from tigerdirect - who buy based on price like a beancounter
>rather than value like an engineeer.
What are you basing that on? Do you know people that have used that?
When I started researching this, I knew nothing about outdoor wireless, so I
started by Googling outdoor wireless. And by far, the most positive
customer reviews I came found were on that AP and the D-Link DWL-2700AP.
With electronics, you can't always go by price alone. Sure, there's lots of
junk that comes out of China, but there's a lot of quality electronic
products too.
this has been an interesting "academic" discussion,
and learned a lot as usual -
but back to the simple & real world...
For - John.B.
1 - what is your broadband connection & speed - in both directions -
2 - get any WAP that support 802.11B/G -
put it up on the clubhouse - don't need a WAN connection -
and run around the site with a laptop.... just monitor the signal strength,
that will tell you where your baseline best case coverage exists
If that doesn't cut it - it ain't gonna happen inside a trailer -
Next - take the WAP and just plant it around the area,
with no connection to a WAN -
just some AC, power it up - and do more "site surveying"
to see how your WAP can be used to cover the area.
That will give you a starting point - of reality -
then you can get back to the academic discussions.....
On Jan 25, 9:02*pm, "JohnB" <jbri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> What are you basing that on? *Do you know people that have used that?
>
> When I started researching this, I knew nothing about outdoor wireless, so I
> started by Googling outdoor wireless. *And by far, the most positive
> customer reviews I came found were on that AP and the D-Link DWL-2700AP.
Quite correct is that price says little. The cheapest unit often
ends up costing the most. Some expensive units can also be crap. If
price really measured value, then GM, whose products are designed
using cost controls, would not be losing money on every car.
Reviews are a good place to start. However which reviewer actually
knows why things do and did not work? Better is to start with a long
list of numeric specifications. From spec comparisons becomes obvious
some specific differences. Some hardware selling on price simply will
not provide important numbers. Then go back to those reviews. Which
reviews discuss these differences? That may weed out about half those
reviews. Useful reviews will typically discuss many items that Jeff
has listed - and with numbers. No numbers? Ignore that review.
Your system must support 802.11 B G and N. That is what future
customers will demand. Other advantages means your access point has
more channels AND can will work flexibly around interference and other
connection problems. For example 802.11 B & G really only provide
three overlapping channels AND are routinely interfered with by
portable phones, microwave ovens, and water. Even wet leaves create
problems not found indoors. 802.11 N means additional channels at
completely different frequencies, better solutions to interference
problems, less problems with loss of signal due to other problems such
as propagation (ie ghosting), and other advantages current and
future. 802.11N provides higher speed only because it is less
resistant to radio frequency problems. Problems that may be most
severe in a campground are interference, blocked, and reflected
signals. Problems that hardware can make less problematic by using N
technology - which is also what your future customers will be using.
If an experienced installer also with technical knowledge, then
maybe find a discounted AP sold by tigerdirect that has value. But
tigerdirect customers are often seeking discounts only on price. Can
you identify rare value in that discount brand name? Best is to start
with an AP from known industry benchmarks. Then buy from tigerdirect
only if they also provide it. Don't select because tigerdirect sells
something at a better price - as so many make the mistake of doing.
But I gather, only from your last post, that you plan to avoid that
mistake.
Still unknown is what your loading will be. Can one access point
support 100 users because rarely are more than 10 users on at any
time? How many actual users will be leasing IP addresses? You will
have maybe 100 such questions to answer or to eventually learn the
hard way. You don't need additional surprises from discounted
hardware.
Plan APs where best located (with cables or tubes for future
network expansion) to reduce the number of surprises that will
inevitably occur later. Also learn of important wiring considerations
posted in that other newsgroup.
>Useful reviews will typically discuss many items that Jeff
>has listed - and with numbers. No numbers? Ignore that review.
Right! Numbers are everything and the only way to tell the
difference between quality and crap. Numbers are difficult to find
and may be inconsistent. The best I've found are on
SmallNetBuilder.com. For example, the WAN->LAN thruput for various
wired and wireless routers:
<http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com_chart/Itemid,189/>
For thruput, they use:
<http://www.ixchariot.com>
which I can't afford to buy. However, I get similar numbers using
Iperf and Jperf:
<http://openmaniak.com/iperf.php>
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/iperf>
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/jperf>
Unfortunately, there are some numbers that are useless. Most router
vendors don't bother supplying the measured receiver sensitivity.
There are plenty of reasons for this, but I don't wanna get into
minutiae. They just copy the numbers from the chipset vendor. One
exception is D-Link, which has apparently actually measured their
products:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/rx-sens/receiver%20sensitivity.htm>
Note the wide variation in values.
>Your system must support 802.11 B G and N. That is what future
>customers will demand.
Demand? I recently screwed up and left the speed at one of my coffee
shop customers locked at 5.5Mbits/sec (on a 3Mbit/sec DSL line). I
think it was like that for at least 3 months before I noticed the
problem. Absolutely nobody complained, demanded anything, or expected
anything better. My customers ask me about the latest technology and
buzzwords which they read in the trade magazines and online, but
rarely "demand" any of them[1]. In my opinion, the trick is to supply
the best that is necessary to do the job, but no more. It's the added
acronyms, features, and functions that seem to cause me all the
problems.
For example, some missing numbers in this exercise are:
1. What maker and model equipment already exists?
2. How many users per access point? How many ACTIVE users per
access point?
3. How many access points to cover the area?
4. Any existing wireless networks in the park?
5. Do you have line of sight to all the camp sites? If not, what's
blocking the signal?
6. Tell me about the existing CATV system? Is it owned by the
campground owner or the cable company? If locally owned, is it a star
or bus topology? Is star, can each leg be isolated to provide
individual feed?
7. Does the CATV coax live in conduit? If so, how big? Do you have
room for gel filled CAT5? If so, you don't need or want wireless.
8. What level of service are you planning to offer? For example, if
you're going to offer 1Mbits/sec per user for 100 users with 10%
loading, you'll need a dedicated 10Mbit/sec backhaul. A cable modem
can do this, but there are restrictions on reselling the bandwidth.
9. What's on the trailer/campsite hookup? Room for a built in
bridge or switch?
10. Are there any financial or budgetary limitations? There always
are, but in this case, it might depend on what the campground charges
for the internet access.
11. Who's gonna adminstrate this system? With 100 potential users,
you have the equivalent of a small ISP (internet service provider).
You'll need all the traditional facilities normally provided by an
ISP, such as billing, administration, support, traffic monitoring,
abuse detection, abuse mitigation, installation, and troubleshooting.
Actually, running a WISP is more difficult than a traditional ISP in
that you also have a rather unreliable method of delivery. One leaky
microwave oven will kill the whole system. Also, who's gonna answer
the phone when a customer can't connect at 2AM?
[1] The exception are government and educational institutions. It
takes so long to get funding and approval that they tend to specify
technology that is well ahead of the state of the art. By the time
the system is actually purchased, the specified products are usually
commodity items. I recently commented on a skool system that
specified 10GigE, which is currently unobtainium. They're guessing 4
years to purchase, which is about right.
On 26/01/2009 01:17, seaweedsl wrote:
> On Jan 24, 8:33 pm, west...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> The AP point should
>> support 802.11 B G and N. There are zero reasons for not doing so.
>
> Ahem. I have a huge one. N is an indoor home user solution. As far
> as I can tell, they aren't made and don't work for outdoor
> applications.
Enterprise class b/g/n
<http://www.ruckuswireless.com/pdf/ds-zoneflex-7942_ot.pdf>
Very good idea!
This project isn't a high priority with the campground owner, he's in no
hurry. And I've been busy lately with other things, so I haven't done much
with this. I'm going to try and get over there this week, to try the tests
you suggested. And... to look around at what's available for conduit that's
already in the ground.
Yup.... lots of good suggestions / information / discussion on this thread.
I appreciate all of it. Learned a lot. As I progress on this project, I'll
post back on here, to update all those that have helped on how this turned
out.
"ps56k" <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote in message
news:%s9fl.2960$%54.1325@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
> this has been an interesting "academic" discussion,
> and learned a lot as usual -
>
> but back to the simple & real world...
> For - John.B.
>
> 1 - what is your broadband connection & speed - in both directions -
>
> 2 - get any WAP that support 802.11B/G -
> put it up on the clubhouse - don't need a WAN connection -
> and run around the site with a laptop.... just monitor the signal
> strength,
> that will tell you where your baseline best case coverage exists
>
> If that doesn't cut it - it ain't gonna happen inside a trailer -
>
> Next - take the WAP and just plant it around the area,
> with no connection to a WAN -
> just some AC, power it up - and do more "site surveying"
> to see how your WAP can be used to cover the area.
>
> That will give you a starting point - of reality -
> then you can get back to the academic discussions.....
>
>
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:30:32 +0000, LR <lrme@privacy.net> wrote:
>Enterprise class b/g/n
><http://www.ruckuswireless.com/pdf/ds-zoneflex-7942_ot.pdf>
Enterprise class price tag: $1,200 street price.
About $160/year for support from Ruckus.
More a/b/g/n from Xirrus:
<http://www.xirrus.com/products/arrays-80211abg+n.php>
Prices run $5,000 to $20,000 each:
<http://www.xirrus.com/cgi-bin/press_releases.cgi?id=205&template=1>
Note that all of these are dual band.
Somehow, I don't think the typical RV campground is going to buy one
of these.
1 - what does the owner expect to invest in this wifi solution ? How
important ?
2 - what is the broadband connection ?
3 - has wifi been there already ?
4 - does the owner expect it to work like a single street light illuminating
the area ?
The last one falls into the category of "managing expectations"
"JohnB" <jbrigan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:497e508b$0$4885$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshostin g.com...
> Very good idea!
> This project isn't a high priority with the campground owner, he's in no
> hurry. And I've been busy lately with other things, so I haven't done
> much with this. I'm going to try and get over there this week, to try the
> tests you suggested. And... to look around at what's available for
> conduit that's already in the ground.
>
> Yup.... lots of good suggestions / information / discussion on this
> thread. I appreciate all of it. Learned a lot. As I progress on this
> project, I'll post back on here, to update all those that have helped on
> how this turned out.
>
>
> "ps56k" <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote in message
> news:%s9fl.2960$%54.1325@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> this has been an interesting "academic" discussion,
>> and learned a lot as usual -
>>
>> but back to the simple & real world...
>> For - John.B.
>>
>> 1 - what is your broadband connection & speed - in both directions -
>>
>> 2 - get any WAP that support 802.11B/G -
>> put it up on the clubhouse - don't need a WAN connection -
>> and run around the site with a laptop.... just monitor the signal
>> strength,
>> that will tell you where your baseline best case coverage exists
>>
>> If that doesn't cut it - it ain't gonna happen inside a trailer -
>>
>> Next - take the WAP and just plant it around the area,
>> with no connection to a WAN -
>> just some AC, power it up - and do more "site surveying"
>> to see how your WAP can be used to cover the area.
>>
>> That will give you a starting point - of reality -
>> then you can get back to the academic discussions.....
>>
>>
>
>
You may want to also consider your target audience... long term,
overnighters, a mixture of both? While there are a few geeks that have their
own sats/waps/new stuff/etc, and some that have wireless networks in their
rv's (assume interference from one of those) the majority (not all) are
older/retired/have older laptops/just want to email/see pix of the
grandkids/probably only want b/g/etc.... since they have HS internet, you
may want to consider an ip phone/cordless phone combo (cheap/usually under
$25 a year (not month)... i use a magicjack on the office computer http://www.magicjack.com), stay here... free unlimited outgoing calls to
your family within the lower 48 on our cordless phone in the clubhouse, and
a hs wired connection off a router for big/fast downloads, one person doing
a huge update over wireless will kill everyone elses thruput),
JohnB wrote:
> Very good idea!
> This project isn't a high priority with the campground owner, he's in
> no hurry. And I've been busy lately with other things, so I haven't
> done much with this. I'm going to try and get over there this week,
> to try the tests you suggested. And... to look around at what's
> available for conduit that's already in the ground.
>
> Yup.... lots of good suggestions / information / discussion on this
> thread. I appreciate all of it. Learned a lot. As I progress on
> this project, I'll post back on here, to update all those that have
> helped on how this turned out.
>
>
> "ps56k" <pschuman_no_spam_me@interserv.com> wrote in message
> news:%s9fl.2960$%54.1325@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> this has been an interesting "academic" discussion,
>> and learned a lot as usual -
>>
>> but back to the simple & real world...
>> For - John.B.
>>
>> 1 - what is your broadband connection & speed - in both directions -
>>
>> 2 - get any WAP that support 802.11B/G -
>> put it up on the clubhouse - don't need a WAN connection -
>> and run around the site with a laptop.... just monitor the signal
>> strength,
>> that will tell you where your baseline best case coverage exists
>>
>> If that doesn't cut it - it ain't gonna happen inside a trailer -
>>
>> Next - take the WAP and just plant it around the area,
>> with no connection to a WAN -
>> just some AC, power it up - and do more "site surveying"
>> to see how your WAP can be used to cover the area.
>>
>> That will give you a starting point - of reality -
>> then you can get back to the academic discussions.....
On Jan 20, 3:13*pm, JohnB <jbri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I need to install wireless internet access for an RV campground. *The
> area that needs to be covered is approximately 750'x350'.
> This is an aerial view of the campground.http://www.brigan.com/images/map..jpg
> Not many trees, but like I said, lots of RVs.
>
> I work in the IT field but have no experience putting in wireless
> outdoors.
> Coverage is part of the issue.... how many WAPs or outdoor antennas to
> use, etc.
>
> But as you can see from the photo, there is a paved road all through
> the area that I need to cover. *I don't want to have to get into a
> situation that we have to run conduit/cabling under that road.
>
> Internet access will originate from the clubhouse shown in the
> pictures. *I could run an underground cable down one side of the
> campground, for a WAP or antenna. *And then see what kind of coverage
> I get in the other side of the campground.
>
> But my question is; what do I have for options, in getting the signal
> to the other side of the campground? *Without tunneling under the
> paved road.
> I've heard of devices, for inside a house, that uses the electrical
> wiring to extend a wired connection. *Can that be used outdoors?
> There's power all through the campground.
>
> Is something like a WiFi extender a possibility for outdoor use?
>
> Any help or input is appreciated.
> Thanks
A campground my wife and I spend a lot of time at is about this same
size and layout. They have 1 AP at the far end of the campground.
Signal strength is OK even at the far end. The problem is being shield
by other other RVs. My solution is to add an external antenna on a
tall mast. Also there is a problem with it getting overloaded when the
park is at capacity. It seems everybody and his brother wants an
internet connection while camping. If I didnt have to check my email
on account of work I wouldnt bother with it. They finally set up a
covered area where you can sit and plug in your laptop. I think that
was a great solution.
Enterprise class b/g/n
<http://www.ruckuswireless.com/pdf/ds-zoneflex-7942_ot.pdf>
There ARE out there ! I stand corrected. And it's interesting
possibilities with beam forming. Anyone install these yet ? Anyone
spec'ing them in?
At $700 -4 1000each, if he needs three, it will only be $2100-
$3000. Let's see, that will buy something like 30 -40
Nanostations.
Whereas buying two Nanos ($160) plus a $40 panel antenna for the
existing rig should bring the total radio antenna cost up to $200 for
G.
It comes down to this: install G, currently used by almost all
outdoor hotspot applications at a cost of approx $200 (assuming three
APs) or future proof by spending over ten times as much.
I suggest that by the time the owners feel any great need for N band
APs, that the prices will have dropped considerably, if the market
even opens up for outdoor N. Strategically, it's going to be far
cheaper to upgrade at that time than to future proof now.
Install G using directional antennas/ APs. Plan to upgrade to the
next viable standard (N or whatever) when that standard becomes
commodity. Not worth the cost to be on leading edge.
On 03/02/2009 14:55, seaweedsl wrote:
> On Jan 26, 8:30 am, LR<l...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>
> Enterprise class b/g/n
> <http://www.ruckuswireless.com/pdf/ds-zoneflex-7942_ot.pdf>
>
>
> There ARE out there ! I stand corrected. And it's interesting
> possibilities with beam forming. Anyone install these yet ? Anyone
> spec'ing them in?
>
You would probably need to ask on the wisp forum at dslreports.
<http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp>
A couple of people seem to have them but not deployed them as yet e.g WiFi35
<http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20441291>
On Feb 3, 11:22*am, LR <l...@privacy.net> wrote:
> On 03/02/2009 14:55, seaweedsl wrote:
>
> > On Jan 26, 8:30 am, LR<l...@privacy.net> *wrote:
>
> You would probably need to ask on the wisp forum at dslreports.
> <http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp>
> A couple of people seem to have them but not deployed them as yet e.g WiFi35
> <http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20441291>
Thanks for the heads up, it's nice to know what's out there. I lurk
over at that forum once in a while, so my question was somewhat
rhetorical.
On 04/02/2009 16:23, seaweedsl wrote:
> On Feb 3, 11:22 am, LR<l...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> On 03/02/2009 14:55, seaweedsl wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 26, 8:30 am, LR<l...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> You would probably need to ask on the wisp forum at dslreports.
>> <http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp>
>> A couple of people seem to have them but not deployed them as yet e.g WiFi35
>> <http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20441291>
>
> Thanks for the heads up, it's nice to know what's out there. I lurk
> over at that forum once in a while, so my question was somewhat
> rhetorical.
>
> Steve
I frequently lurk there to see what people are using and since the
quantity of the items they use can be high you get a better picture of
the actual performance of the equipment.
This one on the PS2 was interesting.
<http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18661399-Powerstation-2-Anyone-deploying-them-with-confidence>
On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 16:38:10 +0000, LR <lrme@privacy.net> wrote:
>This one on the PS2 was interesting.
><http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18661399-Powerstation-2-Anyone-deploying-them-with-confidence>
I almost lost my lunch when I saw the photo of the antenna:
<http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18734222->
That geometry just can't work. Reading through the rest of the
article, it seems that most eveyone agrees that it's a bad design.
There's also a comment from "UBNTMike" which reeks of damage control:
<http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18926716->
That was all from late 2007. Has the antenna been redesigned for the
PowerStation 2?
On 04/02/2009 23:16, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 16:38:10 +0000, LR<lrme@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> This one on the PS2 was interesting.
>> <http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18661399-Powerstation-2-Anyone-deploying-them-with-confidence>
>
> I almost lost my lunch when I saw the photo of the antenna:
> <http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18734222->
> That geometry just can't work. Reading through the rest of the
> article, it seems that most eveyone agrees that it's a bad design.
> There's also a comment from "UBNTMike" which reeks of damage control:
> <http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18926716->
>
> That was all from late 2007. Has the antenna been redesigned for the
> PowerStation 2?
>
>
I don't know. The discussion seems to be about the 18dB Panel antenna
model and I haven't seen anything which confirms a redesign. When the
threads stopped on dslreports I browsed the Ubiquiti forums and there
was nothing to confirm it had been redesigned but they did introduce the
PS2-17D with the dual polarity antenna as an option.
rewists on this one mentioned having the 18v and the original PS2 18.
<http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=834>
At the time I did try to find an FCC ID for the PS2 to see if there were
any changes registered but looking at my notes I evidently didn't find
it. The Ubiquiti products I could find on the FCC site have a prefix
SWX- although I had some confusion over the "Bullets".
I found out that the owner of the campground had been talking to the cable
TV provider at the campground. And they are working on a wired solution, to
each site, using the CATV infrastructure. He was very secretive about the
whole thing, so I'm not real impressed with them.
I'll probably hear from them again, a year from now, wanting to talk about a
wireless solution again.
"JIMMIE" <jimmie68@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5719f1fa-44dd-4316-87ce-81c9cbc62d71@v18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 20, 3:13 pm, JohnB <jbri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I need to install wireless internet access for an RV campground. The
> area that needs to be covered is approximately 750'x350'.
> This is an aerial view of the
> campground.http://www.brigan.com/images/map.jpg
> Not many trees, but like I said, lots of RVs.
>
> I work in the IT field but have no experience putting in wireless
> outdoors.
> Coverage is part of the issue.... how many WAPs or outdoor antennas to
> use, etc.
>
> But as you can see from the photo, there is a paved road all through
> the area that I need to cover. I don't want to have to get into a
> situation that we have to run conduit/cabling under that road.
>
> Internet access will originate from the clubhouse shown in the
> pictures. I could run an underground cable down one side of the
> campground, for a WAP or antenna. And then see what kind of coverage
> I get in the other side of the campground.
>
> But my question is; what do I have for options, in getting the signal
> to the other side of the campground? Without tunneling under the
> paved road.
> I've heard of devices, for inside a house, that uses the electrical
> wiring to extend a wired connection. Can that be used outdoors?
> There's power all through the campground.
>
> Is something like a WiFi extender a possibility for outdoor use?
>
> Any help or input is appreciated.
> Thanks
A campground my wife and I spend a lot of time at is about this same
size and layout. They have 1 AP at the far end of the campground.
Signal strength is OK even at the far end. The problem is being shield
by other other RVs. My solution is to add an external antenna on a
tall mast. Also there is a problem with it getting overloaded when the
park is at capacity. It seems everybody and his brother wants an
internet connection while camping. If I didnt have to check my email
on account of work I wouldnt bother with it. They finally set up a
covered area where you can sit and plug in your laptop. I think that
was a great solution.
On Feb 5, 7:34*am, "JohnB" <jbri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I found out that the owner of the campground had been talking to the cable
> TV provider at the campground. *And they are working on a wired solution, to
> each site, using the CATV infrastructure. *He was very secretive about the
> whole thing, so I'm not real impressed with them.
> I'll probably hear from them again, a year from now, wanting to talk about a
> wireless solution again.
>
> "JIMMIE" <jimmi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:5719f1fa-44dd-4316-87ce-81c9cbc62d71@v18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 20, 3:13 pm, JohnB <jbri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I need to install wireless internet access for an RV campground. The
> > area that needs to be covered is approximately 750'x350'.
> > This is an aerial view of the
> > campground.http://www.brigan.com/images/map.jpg
> > Not many trees, but like I said, lots of RVs.
>
> > I work in the IT field but have no experience putting in wireless
> > outdoors.
> > Coverage is part of the issue.... how many WAPs or outdoor antennas to
> > use, etc.
>
> > But as you can see from the photo, there is a paved road all through
> > the area that I need to cover. I don't want to have to get into a
> > situation that we have to run conduit/cabling under that road.
>
> > Internet access will originate from the clubhouse shown in the
> > pictures. I could run an underground cable down one side of the
> > campground, for a WAP or antenna. And then see what kind of coverage
> > I get in the other side of the campground.
>
> > But my question is; what do I have for options, in getting the signal
> > to the other side of the campground? Without tunneling under the
> > paved road.
> > I've heard of devices, for inside a house, that uses the electrical
> > wiring to extend a wired connection. Can that be used outdoors?
> > There's power all through the campground.
>
> > Is something like a WiFi extender a possibility for outdoor use?
>
> > Any help or input is appreciated.
> > Thanks
>
> A campground my wife and I spend a lot of time at is about this same
> size and layout. They have 1 AP at the far end of the campground.
> Signal strength is OK even at the far end. The problem is being shield
> by other other RVs. My solution is to add an external antenna on a
> tall mast. Also there is a problem with it getting overloaded when the
> park is at capacity. It seems everybody and his brother wants an
> internet connection while camping. If I didnt have to check my email
> on account of work I wouldnt bother with it. They finally set up a
> covered area where you can sit and plug in your laptop. I think that
> was a great solution.
>
> Jimmie
Oh well, as least it stimulated a lot of discussion !
Re: Wireless for RV campground 
Linear Mode
