Wireless Home Network

Wanton

Ok,

I am setting up a small home network, and I am trying to go wireless.

I currently have 2 PC's networked, but I am adding a Laptop in the next few days.

I know absolutly NOTHING about wireless networks. My main question is, what is the range (throught some very thin wall's )

And what do I need, I am trying to stay as inexpensive as possible.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Chaz

All depends on the power of the cards - and the size of the antenna (if any)
But they can normally penetrate thru most normal walls in a house with reasonable ease.

Wanton

Well I pretty much know nothing, so what do i need

Chaz

You need an Access Point - and you then need client cards. They can be USB/Ethernet/PCMCIA

I think the best prices I saw were on Elara Systems. www.elara.ie i think.
Look for wireless access point - 802.11b - should be around 80-120E IIRC - and the client stuff was from about 40E.

Chaz

You can always go for a newer standard - 802.11 a or g

Cards are nice and cheap.

D-Link AirPlus XtremeG DWL-G520 802.11g PCI 54Mbps
31Euro

Wanton

Ok, I just quickly looked these up, you think they would work?

Access Point

I assume i need one of each of these for each PC and one card for the laptop?

PCI to PCMCIA Adaptor

Card


works out at about 265.92 inc. VAT

Chaz

|The link for the AP doesnt work.
Dont buy a PCMCIA card and use a PCI bridge card - far too much hassel.

Get the right thing for PC - PCI/USB etc.

But you have the right idea.

Wanton

Access Point
http://www.komplett.ie/k/ki.asp?action=info&sku=119894&p=&t=1733&l=3&AvdID=1&CatID=19&GrpID=15&cks=PRL


USB
http://www.komplett.ie/k/ki.asp?action=info&sku=119894&p=&t=1733&l=3&AvdID=1&CatID=19&GrpID=15&cks=PRL

This right?

Chaz

For some reason it kicks me back to this:

http://www.komplett.ie/k/k.asp?ck=1&r=1

on both cases.

MrPinK

Most ppl always assume you need to go buy an access point. You don't. The cards can form a peer-to-peer network in ad-hoc mode. The access point is only really needed when the network gets bigger and you have traffic going all over the place, then the access point performs the role of a central point for all traffic to go through. If you want to stay inexpensive then don't bother with one. It's not much of a benefit with only 3 clients anyway. The only thing it might be of use to you for, is extending the range of your wireless network, but this can be done fairly easily with just an empty can of pringles (seriously, just google it to find instructions ).

Chaz

Some cards do not enjoy running in AD HOC mode.
Secondly - for 2 pcs - its not a bad solution - however when a 3rd enters it starts getting diffcult - and with AP costing next to nothing - its worth it - espcially those that have extra ports that can normally route.

quozl

you also get much better throughput if you're in managed mode (using an AP) than just ad-hoc.

Even cheap ones come with other nice things like dhcp servers, web interfaces for mac filtering, wep key management etc.

And with an AP you get the ability to plug a machine without a wireless interface directly into the AP and join it to the wireless network.

They're worth the few quid, mainly for the extra throughput. Wireless is slow.

Greg

Tom Dunne

Originally posted by MrPinK
Most ppl always assume you need to go buy an access point. You don't. The cards can form a peer-to-peer network in ad-hoc mode. The access point is only really needed when the network gets bigger and you have traffic going all over the place, then the access point performs the role of a central point for all traffic to go through. If you want to stay inexpensive then don't bother with one. It's not much of a benefit with only 3 clients anyway. The only thing it might be of use to you for, is extending the range of your wireless network, but this can be done fairly easily with just an empty can of pringles (seriously, just google it to find instructions ).

I have to agree with MrPink on this one. I have three wireless enabled devices at home - a Linux machine, a laptop and a Dell Axim, all connected in ad-hoc mode, all happily talking away.

It is also incredible easy to set up. For a beginner, and a small network, I really think an access point is an overkill. Yes, if you will be adding more clients (over 5, say), but for just three computers - stick with ad hoc.

My set up is as follows:

Linux - Lanready 802.11b wireless card with external antenna (See Comready )

Laptop - IBM Thinkpad T30 with built in WiFi

PDA - Dell Axim with Dell WiFi card ( see Dell website )

The fact that you already have two PC's networked should make setting up the wireless network even easier - the concepts are identical, only the medium is different (i.e. airwaves vs. wires).

blorg

AFAIK you do need an access point for over 3 clients. So I'd recommend one to allow for future expansion, it's not much more than the USB NIC you'd require otherwise. Wire it to the desktop PC through Ethernet - so then you just need:

• Access point wired to desktop PC 1
• USB NIC for desktop PC 2
• PC Card for the laptop

A USB NIC will be cheaper than a PCI NIC, or a PCI adaptor+PC Card. You have more flexibility with positioning it for a good signal also. I got a Corega Mini-11 from Komplett which I'm happy with.

Someone was selling a 802.11b PC Card on the for sale forum for €20 - you might check that out. Otherwise, the SMC PC Card on Komplett is only a few pence more then the CNet, they are a more reputable brand. 3Com is a good bet for the AP.

Don't go near 802.11a. Whether you need 802.11g rather than 802.11b depends on what you will be doing. If it's just internet sharing, 802.11b is fine. If you want to move large files around, go for 802.11g.

If you have thin walls range should be fine.

BigEejit

Originally posted by blorg
Don't go near 802.11a. Whether you need 802.11g rather than 802.11b depends on what you will be doing. If it's just internet sharing, 802.11b is fine. If you want to move large files around, go for 802.11g.

Why not 802.11a? ... I have netgear stuff (HA201 and HAB501 bundle) that I bought on ebay (new, about the same price as 802.11b stuff in Komplett) and it works a dream ... anywhere in the house, never less than the top of 54Mb/s .. and my house has thick concrete walls ...
the advantages of A compared to B and G is that it is the relatively clean 5.2GHz (around this frequency) band and does not get interference from microwaves, video senders, dect phones and other users of the 2.4GHz band used by B and G
My stuff supports 152bit WEP (or 156bit, not sure), its harder to crack .. and there is a LOT less A stuff around, reducing your security needs
The disadvantage of A is that the signal tails off earlier ... but I ask you, will you be more than 100meters away from your access point?

blorg

Because it's more expensive than 802.11g, incompatible with the universally-adopted 802.11b, has shorter range and is likely a dying standard.

I'll grant you the less crowded frequency band, but that's at the cost of compatibility. You're not going to be able to connect up to the average WiFi hotspot with 802.11a.

AFAIK, WEP is the same on 801.11a and b, if you have a longer key length that is just a vendor extension that has nothing to do with the standard (like the 802.11b+ extensions that give 22Mbps).

BigEejit

Originally posted by blorg
Because it's more expensive than 802.11g,

Like I said, get it on ebay ... my access point and pccard cost €130 total (new items, including shipping from US)...throw 802.11a into ebay and see what you get ... plenty of cheap new stuff there (I know there is a lot more 'cheaper' 802.11b stuff, but the point I'm making is that it a lot cheaper than most shops/websites)

incompatible with the universally-adopted 802.11b, has shorter range and is likely a dying standard.

There are far fewer products, and likely a dying standard ... but I think 802.11b is crap, 802.11G is better and after a short while (when it stops being thought of as bleeding edge/enthuasist gear) will supplant B...
Range-wise .... how big is the average house?, my stuff can do full speed for 60 feet (18 meters) in a closed environment ... stepping down to 6Mbit at 90meters in a closed environment ...

I'll grant you the less crowded frequency band, but that's at the cost of compatibility. You're not going to be able to connect up to the average WiFi hotspot with 802.11a.

Compatibility with what? microwaves and video senders? ... I have seen a thread recently on boards where a guy got terrible performance out of his B gear, could have ben caused by next door neighbours dect phone ...
802.11a gear from different vendors is supposed to be as interoperable as other wireless standards...
I have several friends that have 802.11b built into laptops ... and they have never bothered going to a wifi hotspot ... in fact most of them only use wireless at home exclusively ...

AFAIK, WEP is the same on 801.11a and b, if you have a longer key length that is just a vendor extension that has nothing to do with the standard (like the 802.11b+ extensions that give 22Mbps).

Most (not all) 802.11b uses 128bit ... the netgear stuff I have uses real 156 bit wep, and if I felt so like it i could use illegal (in Ireland) bands and get 72Mbit out of my gear (AP can do 104Mbit, but card can only do 72)

blorg

I have no major problem with 802.11a technically, it's just that in recommending what sort of technology to adopt, it's rarely a good idea to recommend what you yourself admit is a dying standard. Sort of like recommending Betamax over VHS because it's technically superior.

With regard to compatibility, 802.11g is compatible with 802.11b, which has very wide deployment. 802.11a is only compatible with itself. It's not just the interoperability with other people's equipment, the technology with the more extensive deployment will be the long-term successful technology. In the future, as you get more gadgets, computers, etc. it is a fair bet that you will find it easier to get them with b or g rather than a.

The interference thing is the only really good reason to go for 802.11a at this stage. Otherwise, taking any single source, you can generally get 801.11g for the same price or less.

Quigs Snr

I'm with Blorg on this one I'd go for 802.11g. If nothing else because my house is quite large and has 3 levels. Rather than ruin the plasterwork which has just cost me a fortune to complete and running cables all over the place I am going for 802.11g because it has a superior range to 802.11a (which uses the 5Ghz band, quicker in theory, but the signal dies fast and doesn't penetrate walls as well). It's quick enough for a network game or two as well !

MrPinK

Originally posted by Chaz
for 2 pcs - its not a bad solution - however when a 3rd enters it starts getting diffcult - and with AP costing next to nothing - its worth it

The prices aren't quite next to nothing yet. If he's shopping locally then he'll be spending near enough €100 on a piece of kit he can do without. He said he's trying to stay as inexpensive as possible.

Originally posted by blorg
AFAIK you do need an access point for over 3 clients. So I'd recommend one to allow for future expansion

In theory there is no limit on the number of ad-hoc peers, but you will experience some performance loss when you start going over 3. It's not going to be huge loss if you stick an extra one or two clients on the network though. Still think it's a bad idea buying the ap now even if you know you're going to need it in the future. By the time it's needed, the one you got back then will have been replaced by bigger and better ap's, maybe even a new 802.11x standard.

quozl

Originally posted by MrPinK
In theory there is no limit on the number of ad-hoc peers, but you will experience some performance loss when you start going over 3.

You get significant performance loss using 2 cards in adhoc mode vs an ap and a card. The protocol is much less effecient, if you dont believe me then do some throughput tests.

The AP is a bit dearer, but you can use it instead of a client card for one of the pcs (connected to a cheap ethernet card). And you get higher throughput, extra management functions, and the ability to place it anywhere the ethernet cable will reach to.

I agree it's not a critical difference, but I'd still go with a cheap AP.

fractal

Wanton,
unless you are fairly damn sure those walls of yours are _thin_ i wouldnt depend on 802.11x cards. If you decide to just go and get PCMCIA wirless cards of any type be warned that the antennaes built on are rubbish. They will be ok for good signals over indoor distances say 100ft but if you have any more than a plasterboard wall inbetween it will severly affect the link quality. Dont even think about trying to use a link through a cavity wall. It will be virtually unuseable without an additional antennae.

If youre trying to stay as inexpensive as possible go with 802.11b cards. With good link quality even over Ad-Hoc mode between 2 machines you'll get performance slightly below that of 10Mbit wired ethernet. Say about 600/700KB/sec. An AP will help but is only really needed when you have several machines.

If that sort of bandwidth aint enough for you your next best option would be .11a cards these will give you a good increase in performace though dont even think about getting anywhere close to the 54Mbit advertised over an ad-hoc connection. You'll be talking 3-4MB/sec with supplied antennaes.

The advantage of 802.11a over .11g is that household appliances such as tv-senders, microwaves and cordless phones wont affect signals on that frequency. I would also recommend staying away from .11g as support for it is still early days and it _is_ prone to interference.

If speed is what you need go for 100Mbit/Gigabit wired ethernet and a decent switch. You'll have to drill a few holes maybe but beats wireless hands down for speed.

If you want to have the option down the line Proxim make combo .11a/11b cards. www.proxim.com

Finally for deals/more info/general questions www.irishwan.org would be a good site to check out and ask questions on the forums..

My 2 cents...

BigEejit

Originally posted by fractal
My 2 cents...

God almighty, lurks for 2 years and then strikes!! :eek: