Computers & Hardware > Networking
Number of 5 GHz channels
Weaver:
I have a couple of Zyxel 2.4 / 5.5 GHz access points and a couple of TP-Link 5 GHz ones.
One Zyxel and one TP-Link 5 GHz device are both in the same building. The TP-link shines out of a window across a field to another building where a partner 5 GHz TP-Link device listens to it, and inside that building is a second Zyxel dual-freq WAP. So two buildings, a pair of WAPs in each, and one AP in the one building is marginally visible into the second building, probably only through the appropriate outward-facing window.
So in the house there are 2 (or 2½ ::) ) 5 GHz WAPs in earshot of one another.
* Would I be in trouble if I added a couple more 5 GHz WAPs in the house? (Making 4 (- 4½) × 5 GHz WLANs overlapping.)
* I had thought about replacing the first Zyxel with a three-pack of linked Ubiquiti devices:
See AAISP shop - Ubiquiti for example.
* Anyone have any idea how these work?
Dray:
What channel width are you using - 80MHz?
I have in the past used 100-104, 60-64, 52-56, 36-40, 44-48, for 5 AP's
Weaver:
I'm not sure. That would be four-x width wouldn't it?
The kit is, I hope all set to auto-configure and find clear channels automatically. I certainly haven't made any explicit channel choices when configuring things, so that it can adapt to future changes.
I don't know if it can be set to reduce the width in use - and so reduce performance - if no block of contiguous x channels can be found.
( BTW I'm not using 2.4 GHz at all. It's set up but I'm just not doing anything with it. There are no neighbours so no congestion problems on that band. So I could also exploit that to a limited extent if need be too. )
aesmith:
Depending on the capabilities of the kit I'd be inclined to either (1) use directional aerials for the building to building link, to minimise signal strength where it overlaps with the APs, or (2) use 2.4GHz for building to building, keeping it completely clear of the 5GHz APs. (2) is what we do for meshed APs, use 2.4GHz for meshing and client connections, 5GHz for client connections only. 2.4GHz has more range, all things being equal.
WWWombat:
Some of this will depend on the capability of the hardware you have bought.
One issue is whether it performs the necessary steps to detect radar. If so, then it opens up availability to 19 channels, each 20MHz wide. Without this, you are restricted to 4 of those channels.
The second issue relates to outdoor use - which you are, essentially, using for your point to point inter-building link. Strictly, you should only be using band B (channels 100-140) for outdoor use, which is entirely within the "radar detection required" spectrum, but also allows for higher power.
This stuff might help - UK specific document first, and other articles following:
http://wifinigel.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/5GHz
I think 2.4GHz only has more range when you can't use the full power capabilities available in the 5GHz spectrum. The document linked above shows the extra power available to Band B, but there is a further Band C available with even higher power - but that requires a minimal amount of licencing with Ofcom.
This Solwise document has some good comparisons between 2.4GHz and 5GHz for both indoor and outdoor use:
http://www.solwise.co.uk/downloads/files/intheuk5ghz.pdf
I reckon you could probably manage to get everything into the 5GHz spectrum if you used decent equipment, with access to the right controls over channels and power. The Ubiquiti stuff probably qualifies.
Ubiquiti seems to have upgraded their range recently, with a couple of new 802.11ac access points. If I were changing our network now, I'd be considering one of the UAP-AC-LITE models, or if I needed the range, the UAP-AC-LR model.
http://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2015/09/ubiquiti-revamps-its-enterprise-unifi-gear-and-weve-got-some-to-review/
@aesmith's advice to consider directional antenna for the inter-building link could be wise.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version