New To Wifi

Hiya :)

I have decided to take the wifi plunge.....sort of...

I don't want to convert my entire network into a wifi LAN. I just want some occasional wifi use like out on the porch or in the kitchen etc. I will keep the ethernet LAN with router, and want to just hook in a wifi access point like this one:

http://www.amazon.com/ZyXEL-WAP3205-.../ref=de_a_smtd

My questions are these:

1. What sort of realistic range should I expect? The longest range of any device would only be about 20 feet away....but would have to penetrate a couple interior and exterior walls.

2. How many devices can make simultaneous connections to an access point like the one above?

Have no desire to go completely wireless with a wifi router or anything. Just this access point connected to the existing home network router.

Thanks.

Now if there is no metal in the walls, link screen wire under plaster, heating ducts, nor lead paint on the walls, you should easily get 100 feet. But the external antennas can be upgrade to help extend the range. Replaced the antennas on my daughters wireless router with 7 dB ones and it made a huge difference. A bit spendy though.

The interior walls are metal lathe plaster.....but again, I only need to go about 20 feet. Any idea how many simultaneous connections I would be able to make. I don't see any occasion where there would be more than three....except if I had a group over for LAN party or something. Not too likely.....I don't have that many friends. LOL :D

Is there a reason you specifically chose the Zyxel? I've never worked with that particular brand/model, but 20' is reasonable if it's not going through a solid rock wall.

You could also get a WAP/Router and just disable DHCP to make it a plain WAP. The prices should be pretty close.

3 connections are no problem. Most routers should be able to support dozens of clients. Of course, performance degrades if you have too many clients at once.

For Wifi router reviews, check out this site:
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/

I have plaster walls, and use a couple of routers a WAP's so we are usually within 30' of one of them. We usually have 3 and sometimes 4 connections to them with good performance.

Price is the only reason I landed on that model....and saw it had a four-star rating at Amazon, which is where I do most of my online shopping. Not completely sold on that particular one, though.

Something else just occurred to me, though. I bought two IP addresses from my ISP. The connection path on my network is cable modem---hub---router. All my machines connect to the router except for one that uses the extra IP and connects to the hub direct and bypasses the router. The speed on this connection is twice what I get on the shared network machines....so I use it when I want a really big file....really fast. Could I buy a wifi router instead of an access point, and connect to the hub just like the wired router? Would there be any advantage to this over an access point on the home network.

In short...a wireless router and a wired router....two separate networks hooked into the hub?

Quote:

---

The connection path on my network is cable modem---hub---router.

---

Are you sure it's a hub and not a switch? If it's a hub, that might be part of your performance problem on the router/switch. Make/model of your hardware would help.

I doubt you would gain performance since they are both going through the same modem. The modem would be the bottleneck.

Oops....apologies. You are right....it's a switch....

Both router and switch are Linksys. The performance dip is not a major problem as I get "good enough" download at about 500-600 KB/sec on those machines. The router, switch and modem are all old....like 7 years. In fact, my ISP has told me I am due for an upgrade on the modem soon.

The machine connecting on the spare IP address routinely gets over 1MB/sec downloads, but hardly ever use it. But maybe using as a second (wireless) network might work?

I'm not optimistic about any performance gains by running two routers, but you could try it. Your hardware's age could be why you have performance degradation.

If the new router performs better, then why not just replace your old router with a new wifi one? All your devices would be on the same network, so you could share files, printers, etc.

I'm not ready to take the whole thing wireless. To be honest, I still don't completely trust wireless...and three machines on the current network are not wireless capable. Only my laptop, netbook and PSP are wifi....and would be the only ones accessing wireless.

So what do you think is best? A wireless access point attached to the existing router....or a wifi router connected to the switch, using the spare IP, creating a separate wifi network? I am not concerned too much about file sharing....just want to be able to sit on the porch this summer and surf the net. ;)

Quote:

---

A wireless access point attached to the existing router....or a wifi router connected to the switch, using the spare IP, creating a separate wifi network?

---

Neither. My first choice would be get rid of the switch and connect the modem to the wifi router directly. That would be much easier to set up.

Since you don't want replace your current router AND you don't want to share files between wired and wireless clients, you can go with the 2 routers on a switch option. If you piggyback the wap to your current router, you'll be able to see the wired clients from the wifi clients.

I will figure out the best way to hook up later....but in terms of the device, any opinions on this one? I am still looking to go cheap here since it won't get used much...

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Cisco+Li...=1218170521806

Midknyte, what is your idea for the best wireless router and or wap right now.
I found I have a possible need for one.

@maxximilian
What is your price range?

@Train
Depends on price range and features. The new Linksys E4200 is supposed to be solid, but a bit pricey. The Netgear WNDR3700v2 is still pretty good.

You can compare the routers in the SNB wifi charts.
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless

Not so much a price range as just wanting to get what I need for the cheapest possible. No need for extra bells and whistles, super long range, etc. Just reliable at about 20-30 feet for at least 3 connections and preferably for around that $50 number.

I didn't even know that Cisco and Linksys had merged, but both are well-known names as opposed to the original access point I posted.

Cisco Acquires Linksys for $500M
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news...s+for+500M.htm

@Midknyte - Thank you. Although, I may need a external antenna model. Hope not.

Going through multiple walls will be a problem, even if they are plaster. You might be able to get a signal, but the connection speed would likely drop. I'm not sure how well a cheap router would do in your particular environment.

3 clients aren't a problem. Even my old 802.11b router could do more than that.

Cisco bought out Linksys a few years ago for their home networking presence. From what I hear, Cisco is going to drop the Linksys name entirely.

OK thanks. I will be looking into it more.....

And if you house is old enough to have lead based paint, take that into consideration. Distance from the router to my laptop was 15 feet with 2 walls and I had to upgrade the antenna to get a usable signal.
House was built in the late 1800's.

@Train
You might also want to check out some D-Links, since they have externals. I haven't kept up with those models, though.

@maxx
I'll look around a bit later. Cisco\Linksys has been pretty reliable for me. The higher end Netgears and D-Links too. Haven't worked with Buffalo, but I've heard good things about them. I'd avoid Belkin or Hawking.

@Midknyte - Will do. Thanks for the help!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Midknyte

@maxx
I'll look around a bit later. Cisco\Linksys has been pretty reliable for me. The higher end Netgears and D-Links too. Haven't worked with Buffalo, but I've heard good things about them. I'd avoid Belkin or Hawking.

---

Thanks, but no need. I decided to take the plunge and bought one. Sometimes one can research something too much and end up talking themselves out of it entirely. I do that alot, so went out and bought one.

I went with Cisco-Linksys similar to the one I posted....but went up a notch from the E1000 to the E1200. I decided on using the spare IP via the switch and everything is working fine so far. It accepted two laptops, a netbook and iPad all at once with no issues. Tested from the backyard and stayed connected. Haven't tried the PSP yet....

If everything continues as is....I should be fine now. Thanks.

Alrighty then. :)

BTW, the E1200 replaced the E1000. The E1200 is from the second generation E-series.

They had both at Best Buy....and I had both in my hands at one point. The price difference was only $5....so went with the newer one. :)

Hi Max, I had a wired ZyXEL router many years ago that my old ISP provided. I used it for 5 years and it was rock solid. Not a single problem. But it was a long time ago and it was not wireless ...

Midknyte, I notice that the ZyXEL provides multiple SSID (secured and guest). I assume the different SSID uses different subnet. If that is the case, would it be secured enough? I mean, the guest SSID can be used for more "risky" web surfing and the other SSID for strictly safe surfing.

Or, if the LAN ports (there are 2) and the guest WLAN SSID used different subnets then would it be more secure even to use the the WLAN for "risky" web surf and all computers still hook up to the LAN ports?