Posted: 5/2/2014 8:06:33 PM EDT
|
wired lan <--> wifi <--> air <--> wifi <--> wired lan
That's what I'm looking for. Downstairs wired LAN getting bridged to upstairs wired LAN via wifi, ideally 802.11AC. Bought a pair of Ubiquity Unifi's after misreading some posts, and they won't do it. I have a cheap beater Linksys running dd-wrt, and it will do the wireless bridge thing. But its slow (b/g) Looking for a pair of devices that will do 802.11AC, or ideally a device that will do N/AC on one end (so I can scrap my Unifi as an AP for my N clients) and another to do AC upstairs to extend the LAN at fastest speeds possible. I have looked at the "wireless extenders" and am curious about them; reviews on newegg and amazon are hit or miss. Any products come to mind? I am wholly impressed with Ubiquiti's quality, their products are many light years beyond what I can buy at Best Buy and other consumer-grade crap. I'd love to stay with their products for that reason alone, but they seem to do lots of long-haul stuff, and I literally need to bridge a network through 10 feet of air, wood floor, and sheetrock. |
|
just by 2 n routers running ddrwrt.
then put one in bridge mode. that is how I do it for my stuff. have a main router downstairs with hard lines to most stuff. and a bridged router upstairs runnning wired to my other stuff up there. I don't know of one that does both n/ac but who knows. you could check newegg with those search criteria. |
|
I don't think they sell them anymore.
mine are a few years old. but I typically pick the buffalo routers. air station N's. they come preloaded with DDRWRT. as for speeds, I don't know if I have tested between machines. But we typically stream HD tv from the pvr upstairs to the downstairs with mixed settings with no issues. I would have to elminate a few older items to go to straight N on the routers and that would be even faster. |
|
If it's 10 feet why not just drill a couple holes and drop a cable? I've yet to see an 802.11ac device with reviews better than 50% saying that it actually works consistently and doesn't drop connections when you put a load on it. Also, going between floors is going to be even harder with wireless since most devices have omnidirectional antennas with poor coverage going up and down.
Or maybe try this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833320174 if you feel like throwing a bunch of money at it. |
|
Quoted:
If it's 10 feet why not just drill a couple holes and drop a cable? I've yet to see an 802.11ac device with reviews better than 50% saying that it actually works consistently and doesn't drop connections when you put a load on it. Also, going between floors is going to be even harder with wireless since most devices have omnidirectional antennas with poor coverage going up and down. Or maybe try this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833320174 if you feel like throwing a bunch of money at it. Rental. And even after we buy it, having an electrician come in and pull cables/patch walls/paint is gonna be on the expensive side. If I go that route I might as well have the entire house cabled, which ain't gonna be cheap. Was hoping a wireless solution could give me enough whole-house bandwidth (and bridge my rooms with numerous wired devices in them) to get me past the hump until the next best thing comes out. Even if we go the wired route, it will be a year before we buy the house and can do our own customizing like punching holes in sheetrock and firebreaks to pull cables. |
|
Quoted:
If you have an answer for the OP would you mind providing a parts list as well? Im intrested in doing this at my home to get better signal to the man cave Depending on what speeds you really need (and I am considering this option as well), the Uqibuity Nanostations are the answer. I'm currently running ethernet-over-AC but am getting dismal speeds (8-20mbs). The Nanostations would certainly help, but with 802.11AC out in force, I was hoping to avoid "last year's technology" and get the fastest stuff available now so I don't end up with a money put that I am endlessly upgrading (going from n devices to ac devices and from 200mb powerline to 600mb powerline etc) |
|
Quoted:
Depending on what speeds you really need (and I am considering this option as well), the Uqibuity Nanostations are the answer. I'm currently running ethernet-over-AC but am getting dismal speeds (8-20mbs). The Nanostations would certainly help, but with 802.11AC out in force, I was hoping to avoid "last year's technology" and get the fastest stuff available now so I don't end up with a money put that I am endlessly upgrading (going from n devices to ac devices and from 200mb powerline to 600mb powerline etc) Quoted:
Quoted:
If you have an answer for the OP would you mind providing a parts list as well? Im intrested in doing this at my home to get better signal to the man cave Depending on what speeds you really need (and I am considering this option as well), the Uqibuity Nanostations are the answer. I'm currently running ethernet-over-AC but am getting dismal speeds (8-20mbs). The Nanostations would certainly help, but with 802.11AC out in force, I was hoping to avoid "last year's technology" and get the fastest stuff available now so I don't end up with a money put that I am endlessly upgrading (going from n devices to ac devices and from 200mb powerline to 600mb powerline etc) Hell im barely getting 2 mb download down stairs lol. My router is old so it is possibly the problem. Ill try and grab some of those routers you mentioned and give it a shot. |
|
Quoted: Rental. And even after we buy it, having an electrician come in and pull cables/patch walls/paint is gonna be on the expensive side. If I go that route I might as well have the entire house cabled, which ain't gonna be cheap. Was hoping a wireless solution could give me enough whole-house bandwidth (and bridge my rooms with numerous wired devices in them) to get me past the hump until the next best thing comes out. Even if we go the wired route, it will be a year before we buy the house and can do our own customizing like punching holes in sheetrock and firebreaks to pull cables. Quoted: Quoted: If it's 10 feet why not just drill a couple holes and drop a cable? I've yet to see an 802.11ac device with reviews better than 50% saying that it actually works consistently and doesn't drop connections when you put a load on it. Also, going between floors is going to be even harder with wireless since most devices have omnidirectional antennas with poor coverage going up and down. Or maybe try this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833320174 if you feel like throwing a bunch of money at it. Rental. And even after we buy it, having an electrician come in and pull cables/patch walls/paint is gonna be on the expensive side. If I go that route I might as well have the entire house cabled, which ain't gonna be cheap. Was hoping a wireless solution could give me enough whole-house bandwidth (and bridge my rooms with numerous wired devices in them) to get me past the hump until the next best thing comes out. Even if we go the wired route, it will be a year before we buy the house and can do our own customizing like punching holes in sheetrock and firebreaks to pull cables. I ran cat6 to most rooms in my house. Set me back a spool of cable, a patch panel, connectors, keyhole saw, and keystone jacks. A few hundred tops. Its even easier if you have phone jacks you aren't using to cannibalize. Done right its going to leave nothing more than another faceplate on the wall and a patch panel in a closet.
|
|
Quoted:
I ran cat6 to most rooms in my house. Set me back a spool of cable, a patch panel, connectors, keyhole saw, and keystone jacks. A few hundred tops. Its even easier if you have phone jacks you aren't using to cannibalize. Done right its going to leave nothing more than another faceplate on the wall and a patch panel in a closet. This is my long-term goal, however having never patched sheetrock before, and having to re-texture the wall and match paint, combined with the ultimate necessity of having the patch jobs be pleasing to the wife, is making me consider wireless for now. |
|
If I understand correctly, you basically want one of these: http://www.amazon.com/Bridge-4-Port-Gigabit-Speeds-Wireless/dp/B00A66WJWK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1399271692&sr=8-1&keywords=wireless+bridge+ac Here are some others which might work for your situation: http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords=wireless+bridge+ac&tag=googhydr-20&index=aps&hvadid=36242384918&hvpos=1t1&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=675616450626892821&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=b&hvdev=c&ref=pd_sl_6r18grrujp_b If the speed isn't such of a big issue, I have one of these and love it: http://www.amazon.com/TP-LINK-TL-WR702N-Wireless-Repeater-150Mpbs/dp/B007PTCFFW/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1399270146&sr=8-4&keywords=tp-link It works like greased lightning, and I'm waiting for them to come out with an AC version. Here's the problem... If you get something cheap like that to get you by for now, you'll probably be better off just using it as a wireless bridge or a repeater instead of "client mode," because its ethernet port is only 10/100 instead of gigabit. However, if you're only using it for internet, then that's probably not such a big deal. The good news is it can do all of those modes, so you can experiment with it some to find what works best.  I'm not sure if you know all of the terminology. A wireless bridge usually means you are using a router to wirelessly connect to another router in order to extend the network range. A repeater works the same way, but the bridge feature typically will have the 2nd router on its own SSID. The repeater function has the 2nd router on the same SSID as the host router. Client mode typically means you are doing the same thing as a bridge, but instead using ethernet to connect to the 2nd router instead of via wireless. Access point mode is when you have an ethernet cable running through the house, and you connect a wifi router to the jack to provide wireless coverage to devices within that room. Just a side note, it can be fairly tricky for a novice to get all the parameters set properly when first tinkering with a wireless bridge feature. You have to provide the bridging router with the details of the host router: like the channels its using, the MAC address, the security encryption type and log on information, etc. It can be kind of confusing when you start tinkering with IP addresses and such. It also depends if you want the new router's wifi network to be on the same subnet as the host, thus allowing the new router's clients to also see the host router's clients on the network for file sharing. For example, if you wanted them to be separate, you could set up the new router to be on 192.168.1.X while the host router is on 192.168.0.X, or something like that. However, it sounds like you just want a standard setup. When I setup my network, I made sure to leave a few IP addresses available on the host router so it doesn't try to force the new router onto DHCP. For example, if the host router is 192.168.1.1, I would set its DHCP range to let's say 192.168.1.10-20. Then, I would set the new router to 192.168.1.2 and have its range as 192.168.1.21-30 or something like that. I was previously having a problem where the bridging router was actually taking control of the host's clients and forcing them on its DHCP range, but they couldn't get internet because the modem was obviously connected to the host router. After some tinkering, I found out the problem was that I had the host router assigning an ip address to the bridging router via DHCP, and then the bridging router would then reassign all of the host's clients to its own DHCP. That's how I figured out that little fix. There are a number of ways to set it up, you just have to figure out what works for you. Hope this helps |
|
Quoted:
If I understand correctly, you basically want one of these: http://www.amazon.com/Bridge-4-Port-Gigabit-Speeds-Wireless/dp/B00A66WJWK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1399271692&sr=8-1&keywords=wireless+bridge+ac Quoted:
If I understand correctly, you basically want one of these: http://www.amazon.com/Bridge-4-Port-Gigabit-Speeds-Wireless/dp/B00A66WJWK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1399271692&sr=8-1&keywords=wireless+bridge+ac Hadn't seen this yet, but yeah, that's exactly what I am trying to do. Do you know if I can buy a pair of these, instead of one of these and one router? I have two Unifi APs already, and have pfsense doing routing/dhcp etc, so I don't need a router per say. Plus these WD bidges are cheaper than their routers... If I could complete the link using two of their bridges, at $70/ea, that would be totally awesome. Quoted:
Just a side note, it can be fairly tricky for a novice to get all the parameters set properly when first tinkering with a wireless bridge feature. You have to provide the bridging router with the details of the host router: like the channels its using, the MAC address, the security encryption type and log on information, etc. It can be kind of confusing when you start tinkering with IP addresses and such. It also depends if you want the new router's wifi network to be on the same subnet as the host, thus allowing the new router's clients to also see the host router's clients on the network for file sharing. For example, if you wanted them to be separate, you could set up the new router to be on 192.168.1.X while the host router is on 192.168.0.X, or something like that. However, it sounds like you just want a standard setup. I appreciate the info. I was a network engineer for 12 years prior to a major career change, and I find that doing it as hobby is much more satisfying than getting paid for it. I have an idea of how these need to be set up, I just haven't kept up on the 802.11x technology lately, and all of the different features and modes. I ran dd-wrt on an old Linksys years ago and accomplished this, albeit slowly, and was looking to do it with the latest and greatest (and fastest) technology of the day. Quoted:
When I setup my network, I made sure to leave a few IP addresses available on the host router so it doesn't try to force the new router onto DHCP. For example, if the host router is 192.168.1.1, I would set its DHCP range to let's say 192.168.1.10-20. Then, I would set the new router to 192.168.1.2 and have its range as 192.168.1.21-30 or something like that. I was previously having a problem where the bridging router was actually taking control of the host's clients and forcing them on its DHCP range, but they couldn't get internet because the modem was obviously connected to the host router. After some tinkering, I found out the problem was that I had the host router assigning an ip address to the bridging router via DHCP, and then the bridging router would then reassign all of the host's clients to its own DHCP. That's how I figured out that little fix. My main concern right now is things like WDS and MAC address passing. I need all of my network hardware to pass *all* client MAC addresses so pfsense and untangle can do their thing (largely based on IP address, but occasionally MAC address for dhcp and allowing clients etc). WDS does this from what I've read, but at the cost of halving the bandwidth available. I can live with half bandwidth if I am getting 5GHz AC in the 1300-1900mbps range. The two devices that will be the bridge endpoint (or WDS endpoints or however you want to describe them) will be separated by 10-15' and a floor and some sheetrock. So I expect 5GHz to work well enough, and 2.4GHz for sure. I know they are commercial grade devices, but my Ubiquiti Unifi's are blasting wifi to my entire house with signal levels I've never, ever seen in any consumer grade device I've ever used. So I know that with the right hardware I can get this thing up and running with speeds sufficient enough to allow me to put off cabling for a while. Hoping the WD units can work as a set, instead of having to get a separate router. Or, at the very least, I may try one of them paired with one of my Unifi's, and then when the AC 1300 Unifi-AC comes out of beta, upgrade my primary AP to that. Thanks for the help!!! |
|
Quoted:
If you have an answer for the OP would you mind providing a parts list as well? Im intrested in doing this at my home to get better signal to the man cave Just read about Western Digital's My Net AC bridges... hoping to see if I can use two of them, rather than one of them and a router, but they look promising, at least on paper. |
|
Quoted:
Just read about Western Digital's My Net AC bridges... hoping to see if I can use two of them, rather than one of them and a router, but they look promising, at least on paper. Quoted:
Quoted:
If you have an answer for the OP would you mind providing a parts list as well? Im intrested in doing this at my home to get better signal to the man cave Just read about Western Digital's My Net AC bridges... hoping to see if I can use two of them, rather than one of them and a router, but they look promising, at least on paper. Will do thank you |
|
Quoted:
Will do thank you Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If you have an answer for the OP would you mind providing a parts list as well? Im intrested in doing this at my home to get better signal to the man cave Just read about Western Digital's My Net AC bridges... hoping to see if I can use two of them, rather than one of them and a router, but they look promising, at least on paper. Will do thank you More research had shown that WD has discontinued its network line. So support won't be great, and firmware updates are unlikely. I am still looking at picking up a router/bridge combo pair, to make room for new AC clients in the future. I am also crossing my fingers for a dd-wrt or OpenWRT release, which would be stellar, especially if we can gain control of the radios' power levels. Still researching! Where's my beer? |
|
Quoted: More research had shown that WD has discontinued its network line. So support won't be great, and firmware updates are unlikely. I am still looking at picking up a router/bridge combo pair, to make room for new AC clients in the future. I am also crossing my fingers for a dd-wrt or OpenWRT release, which would be stellar, especially if we can gain control of the radios' power levels. Still researching! Where's my beer? This guy made some tests with a Cisco Wifi AC router from this basement. You can watch it here and see his conclusions. He's using a wireless AC bridge by connecting it to his laptop via gigabit ethernet, which is what you are planning to do IIRC. http://youtu.be/cjM9WoRBw0w?t=7m46s Basically, he was getting a 5GHz signal through to his basement, which was made out of brick, concrete, plaster, and steel mesh. His speeds are fairly impressive IMHO, but I'm just an amateur and don't really know anything about the properties of wifi propagation. His results were much better with 40 & 80GHz channel widths. The 20GHz width did not perform nearly as well. Based on that video, I don't think you will have much problem with wifi AC if you are going just up to the floor above, depending on the overall distance from the host router, of course. Keep in mind that he is able to get gigabit speeds because he's using gigabit ethernet to connect to the bridging router. Otherwise, he would have to use a USB 3.0 wifi AC adapter to get those speeds since USB 2.0 is capped at around 480Mbps. I'm going to assume his laptop didn't have any USB 3.0 ports but he did have a gigabit ethernet jack, so he decided to connect via ethernet. When I was reading about wireless bridges, most of the literature I came across said that the speeds with a bridge are basically cut in half. However, for some reason I THINK that only applies if you are connecting to the bridging router via wifi. I don't know if that also applies if you are using it in "client" mode and connecting via ethernet. I guess in that scenario you are using the bridging router as sort of a super-duper antenna, assuming normal USB wifi adapters aren't as sensitive as the routers. So maybe that's something to take into consideration, but then again I'm just guessing here. Also, regarding "chaining" wireless bridges... Yes, I know for certain it's possible to do multiple times. You just have to set up the successive bridges to connect to the previous bridge via MAC address and to copy that previous bridge's wifi settings. However, I read that each consecutive bridge you chain into the line reduces your speed by half. I'm not sure if that is accurate, but that is why I would rather put the router in the middle of the house and just use a couple of wifi bridges connecting to the host router...like a major airline hub. I like tinkering with this stuff so maybe you can play around with it and let us know how it goes. |
|
Quoted:
This guy made some tests with a Cisco Wifi AC router from this basement. You can watch it here and see his conclusions. He's using a wireless AC bridge by connecting it to his laptop via gigabit ethernet, which is what you are planning to do IIRC. http://youtu.be/cjM9WoRBw0w?t=7m46s Basically, he was getting a 5GHz signal through to his basement, which was made out of brick, concrete, plaster, and steel mesh. His speeds are fairly impressive IMHO, but I'm just an amateur and don't really know anything about the properties of wifi propagation. His results were much better with 40 & 80GHz channel widths. The 20GHz width did not perform nearly as well. Based on that video, I don't think you will have much problem with wifi AC if you are going just up to the floor above, depending on the overall distance from the host router, of course. Keep in mind that he is able to get gigabit speeds because he's using gigabit ethernet to connect to the bridging router. Otherwise, he would have to use a USB 3.0 wifi AC adapter to get those speeds since USB 2.0 is capped at around 480Mbps. I'm going to assume his laptop didn't have any USB 3.0 ports but he did have a gigabit ethernet jack, so he decided to connect via ethernet. When I was reading about wireless bridges, most of the literature I came across said that the speeds with a bridge are basically cut in half. However, for some reason I THINK that only applies if you are connecting to the bridging router via wifi. I don't know if that also applies if you are using it in "client" mode and connecting via ethernet. I guess in that scenario you are using the bridging router as sort of a super-duper antenna, assuming normal USB wifi adapters aren't as sensitive as the routers. So maybe that's something to take into consideration, but then again I'm just guessing here. Also, regarding "chaining" wireless bridges... Yes, I know for certain it's possible to do multiple times. You just have to set up the successive bridges to connect to the previous bridge via MAC address and to copy that previous bridge's wifi settings. However, I read that each consecutive bridge you chain into the line reduces your speed by half. I'm not sure if that is accurate, but that is why I would rather put the router in the middle of the house and just use a couple of wifi bridges connecting to the host router...like a major airline hub. I like tinkering with this stuff so maybe you can play around with it and let us know how it goes. Quoted:
Quoted:
More research had shown that WD has discontinued its network line. So support won't be great, and firmware updates are unlikely. I am still looking at picking up a router/bridge combo pair, to make room for new AC clients in the future. I am also crossing my fingers for a dd-wrt or OpenWRT release, which would be stellar, especially if we can gain control of the radios' power levels. Still researching! Where's my beer? This guy made some tests with a Cisco Wifi AC router from this basement. You can watch it here and see his conclusions. He's using a wireless AC bridge by connecting it to his laptop via gigabit ethernet, which is what you are planning to do IIRC. http://youtu.be/cjM9WoRBw0w?t=7m46s Basically, he was getting a 5GHz signal through to his basement, which was made out of brick, concrete, plaster, and steel mesh. His speeds are fairly impressive IMHO, but I'm just an amateur and don't really know anything about the properties of wifi propagation. His results were much better with 40 & 80GHz channel widths. The 20GHz width did not perform nearly as well. Based on that video, I don't think you will have much problem with wifi AC if you are going just up to the floor above, depending on the overall distance from the host router, of course. Keep in mind that he is able to get gigabit speeds because he's using gigabit ethernet to connect to the bridging router. Otherwise, he would have to use a USB 3.0 wifi AC adapter to get those speeds since USB 2.0 is capped at around 480Mbps. I'm going to assume his laptop didn't have any USB 3.0 ports but he did have a gigabit ethernet jack, so he decided to connect via ethernet. When I was reading about wireless bridges, most of the literature I came across said that the speeds with a bridge are basically cut in half. However, for some reason I THINK that only applies if you are connecting to the bridging router via wifi. I don't know if that also applies if you are using it in "client" mode and connecting via ethernet. I guess in that scenario you are using the bridging router as sort of a super-duper antenna, assuming normal USB wifi adapters aren't as sensitive as the routers. So maybe that's something to take into consideration, but then again I'm just guessing here. Also, regarding "chaining" wireless bridges... Yes, I know for certain it's possible to do multiple times. You just have to set up the successive bridges to connect to the previous bridge via MAC address and to copy that previous bridge's wifi settings. However, I read that each consecutive bridge you chain into the line reduces your speed by half. I'm not sure if that is accurate, but that is why I would rather put the router in the middle of the house and just use a couple of wifi bridges connecting to the host router...like a major airline hub. I like tinkering with this stuff so maybe you can play around with it and let us know how it goes. I like how he used an online stopwatch to calculate transfer speeds 
Regardless, I don't know why he is even running 802.11ac if he is only getting ~160Mbit in the best case. That isn't much better than you can get with a good N setup |
|
Quoted:
This guy made some tests with a Cisco Wifi AC router from this basement. You can watch it here and see his conclusions. He's using a wireless AC bridge by connecting it to his laptop via gigabit ethernet, which is what you are planning to do IIRC. http://youtu.be/cjM9WoRBw0w?t=7m46s Saw that. Had initially considered that bridge, too, but it has seriously bad reviews everywhere I look. |
|
http://www.amazon.com/Securifi-Almond-Touchscreen-Wireless-Extender/dp/B0087NZ31S
http://www.securifi.com/almondplus I will be holding out for the + (AC) model based on insanely good reviews on the N model on amazon. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA1EA0K66626 buying a set of these in the meantime, this is what i had been looking for all along (wish they were 802.11AC though) and took a long time to finally find the solution. this will give me what I want, relatively inexpensively, and then I can slowly upgrade to AC as the software and hardware matures and comes down in price. |
|
Quoted:
http://www.amazon.com/Securifi-Almond-Touchscreen-Wireless-Extender/dp/B0087NZ31S http://www.securifi.com/almondplus I will be holding out for the + (AC) model based on insanely good reviews on the N model on amazon. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA1EA0K66626 buying a set of these in the meantime, this is what i had been looking for all along (wish they were 802.11AC though) and took a long time to finally find the solution. this will give me what I want, relatively inexpensively, and then I can slowly upgrade to AC as the software and hardware matures and comes down in price. I like the touch screen router as an extender. So for your setup, what is your primary router? And what after that are you using to extend the range? |
|
I have used older models of these to extend a wired network, throughput was much better then a wireless bridge |
|
Quoted:
So for your setup, what is your primary router? And what after that are you using to extend the range? pfsense handles routing and dhcp. Two UniFi APs provide 802.11N to the house. Just need something to extend the wired LAN, and the AirWires (though out of production and no longer supported, grrrrr) look promising. |
|
Quoted:
I have used older models of these to extend a wired network, throughput was much better then a wireless bridge http://www.amazon.com/Linksys-Powerline-Wireless-Extender-PLWK400/dp/B0087O6AQE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1399926667&sr=8-1&keywords=ac+network+extender http://www.amazon.com/TP-LINK-TL-PA511-Powerline-Starter-Kit/dp/B0081FLFQE/ref=pd_cp_pc_1 I have several ZyXel 200mbps adapters now and can't get over 25mbps (not MBps, mbps). I've tried troubleshooting a little, but can't easily turn off and/or unplug everything in the house to do it properly. No matter what outlet I try, I get the red "good" (aka horrible) connectivity LED flashing. At the very least, there are two breakers in between my downstairs LAN and my upstairs LAN. Plus whatever noise-making devices are wreaking havoc on my wiring. My concern is that faster powerline adapters will only achieve the same rate, and I'd just be wasting money. At least with an 802.11N bridge, my speeds should be much better than what I'm seeing now with powerline, and I can use them to bring service to the garage once more/better products come out and I'm either able to a> clean up my AC power lines or b> get an 802.11AC setup including bridges for remote LANs. dd-wrt (licensed) and OpenWRT (not mature) are available on the UniFi AC, so maybe in a few months that combo will have matured to the point of being usable. That's my hope, anyhow. |
|
Ubiquiti has nice WiFi equipment (airFiber $$), also Open-Mesh. The Open-Mesh APs w/o wired access to the gateway will automatically bridge. So the 300Mbps bridged 'should' give you 150Mbs on the LAN port. I like Open-Mesh, the admin is similar to Meraki. http://www.open-mesh.com/products/access-points/om2p-hs.html
|