Just curious how far your Wi-Fi access point is from your desktop computer

Hi Dan Purgert,

I'm advocating they plug the device into the any RJ45 they have handy o Voila! Instant WiFi extended range!

Everything I speak about here is range that almost anyone here can attain o Simply by using the Plain Jane Wi-Fi 802.11 protocols they already use

For example, they can plug this PowerBeam horn into a router or switch o And by doing so, they instantly attain Wi-Fi range at maximum legal power

Note very clearly Dan Purgert ... this works with EVERYTHING they have now o It works with mobile devices, laptops, desktops, routers, switches, etc.

*It works with anything & _everything_ that uses Plain Jane Wi-Fi, Dan.*

You are, apparently, advocating non-Wi-Fi protocols, for "long shots" o Which is fine, for "long shots"... but it doesn't work with everything

Even so, you said (& I agree) that Plain Jane Wi-Fi can go for miles o In this thread, I'm advocating use of Plain Jane "Wi-Fi" devices

You apparently have a pre-defined predilection for the non-Wi-Fi protocols o But your innate preference for those specific non-Wi-Fi protocols o Does not make suggestions based on Plain Jane Wi-Fi protocols "daft"

It just doesn't.

Non-Wi-Fi protocols are simply another way of accomplishing the same task o Particularly for "long hauls" (where you're talking many miles)

Which is fine but that's NOT what this thread is mostly about Dan. o Even pjp's distances are laughably puny for Wi-Fi protocols, Dan.

So stop saying that the use of WiFi protocols to extend range is daft, Dan. o The WiFi protocols work just fine for extending range at home, Dan.

If someone on this thread simply wants to increase their range at home o Then the Plain Jane 802.11 WiFi protocols are just fine, Dan.

In fact, the Plain Jane 802.11 protocols with EVERYTHING they have, Dan. o For you to imply that's "daft", is, well, it's daft Dan.

I have nothing against your suggestion of non-Wi-Fi protocols o But EVERYTHING I'm suggesting to extend home range is via WiFi protocols

It's not daft, Dan, to use WiFi protocols to extend range at home. o In fact, it's a great idea for home use that works wonderfully well

I'm advocating they plug the device into the any RJ45 they have handy o Voila! Instant WiFi extended range!

Elegant. Simple. Powerful. Functional. Beautiful. KISS. 'Repurposable.

<snip>

Ubiquiti is using it correctly. A wireless bridge connects two wired networks or segments of one network. That's exactly what you have when you set up wifi. It's a wire at both ends with wireless in the middle. A network, or network segment, need not be multiple devices. A single device qualifies.

<snip>

The nanobridge's had larger dishes (and higher gain). The nanobeams were the newer product with slightly better CPUs And, I suspect, were designed for much shorter links.

<snip>

This is not difficult.

decibel = a logarithmic scale used to reference one unit of power to another. (which is why you can't transmit in decibels. A decibel is a dimensionless unit. It's used to quantify the ratio between two values, such as signal-to-noise ratio.)

dBm = power ratio in reference to a milliwatt

dBi = power ratio in reference to an isotropic transmitter. (isotropic is equal in all directions)

mw = milliwatts (1/1000 of a watt)

Case in point. I wanted to link my shop to the house LAN. I bought a pair of Ubiquiti Litebeam M5 links. One on the front of the shop and one on the front of the house.

Not bad, 65 MBS. Then spring happened. My Pecan tree and the neighbor's in the front yard leafed out. My link speed dropped to about 100 KBS.

I moved the house transceiver to a sign out next to the street. Line of sight again. Link speed went up to 150 MBS.

Meanwhile, everything at the shop acted like it was just plugged into the AT&T U-Verse modem/router. As it should be.

Side note: Arlen is a carbuncle on the ass of humanity. Every one of his diatribes has been a bullshit laden rant. Whether it be Apple f****ng it's customers, front end tire alignment or this crap about WiFi.

Hi Johann Beretta,

Thank you for those decibel & milliwatt clarifications, where the members of the chosen newsgroups likely have pretty good comprehension of the math. o

o o

What's nice is that our conversation showing how easy it is to extend the range of WiFi is 'permanently' archived in the typical web searchable sites such that others can benefit from the information you and I and Jeff Liebermann shared, now, and long into the future. o

o o

I consider my main shared "item of technical value" was simply that... A. People _can_ obtain this "instant extended range" B. Relatively easily (by plugging these devices into RJ45 ports) C. At "about" the same cost as they pay today for less powerful devices

For example, plugging a properly configured PowerBeam horn into a laptop

instantly provides the laptop with a powerful bridge to WiFi access points.

Just as plugging in that same horn into your spare old router would instantly & vastly extend the range of otherwise unused router, would it not? (Focus on range, as speeds are limited to the slowest device.)

And, while I've never tried it, I don't see any reason plugging that horn into the back of a "dumb switch" wouldn't also turn it into a powerful omni access point, do you?

Since I haven't tried the switch idea, I'd ask others here who have o Wouldn't all those arrangements work to instantly "extend the range" (where extending the range of a switch is to add the access point).

This is the FIRST statement you've made in the post I'm responding to, Johann, that indicates you can post valuable information with purposefully helpful intent - which I appreciate - on behalf of Usenet archives.

The reason I asked you is that question is that, as I had stated prior, I have no experience with running these devices off the grid, but where I know the WISP professionals have solar-charged battery backups at many of their remote sites.

Given I have no experience running these devices off the grid, I'm not sure if the WISP professionals run these devices directly off the 12VDC though, or via inverters, as with the case of the RV, I'm not sure if pjp could run off the inverter or off the battery itself, as, I said, I have no experience running these devices off the grid.

Assuming 1 amp at 12 volts DC (i.e., 12 Watts), the question is how long can an RV battery realistically hold out.

I never owned an RV, so I don't even know how large they are, or how many they have, so, googling, the first hit was this "Basic RV Electricity" o

o

I only skimmed those RV basics, as I was just looking for the amp hour rating of the typical batteries.

Searching Amazon for RV batteries, this "WindyNation" 100amp-Hour battery shows up a lot so let's start with that for now as a starting point: o WindyNation 100 amp-Hour 100AH 12V 12 Volt AGM Deep Cycle Sealed Lead Acid Battery - Solar RV UPS Off-Grid (1 pc 100 amp-Hour)

So, at 1 amp discharge rate, it seems that battery could last about 4 days in perfect situations, where, we have to leave a reserve (I assume, unless it's a spare battery) cutting that in half, and if we assume other non-ideal conditions, we can cut that half in half, so, it seems, given that battery, at a 1 amp discharge rate, it would last an entire day.

I'm sure you'll let me know where my arithmetic is off, if it is off. o I love to be corrected with facts

Adults do two things, which is why their belief systems are rational o Adults comprehend basic facts, and, o Adults form belief systems that can change if the facts change

Do you concur that the arithmetic works out to 'about a day' of use? o If not, why not.

Please act like an adult, and don't call it a "f****ng battery" for example; just deal with the arithmetic please. Like adults should.

This is another useful adult observation, which will not only help others, but which will also remain in the Usenet archives 'permanently' (for whatever value of permeant the Internet can provide) such that others will find it useful in future searches.

I agree with you that we don't have much of an idea of the foliage o And I agree, we avoid foliage if we can (usually with height)

The good news is that height is possible at both ends, and, that there must be a slope involved since pjp mentioned the shot was "all downhill".

Your advice to narrow the beam is apropos, as is your advice to test it out, which is what we do all the time out here (but we have a LOT of spare equipment, including a light tripod to mount the rockets to quite nicely).

I do agree with you also that you start with full transmit power, and then you dial it down until it stops working, and then dial it back up for what I call "headroom" but which has a proper term.

I generally seek about a dozen decibels of what I call 'headroom' (Jeff Liebermann more accurately discussed the terminology & calculations, including a table, in a prior helpful post elsewhere in this thread).

Thanks for that purposefully helpful advice for pjp, which others can also benefit from, given Usenet is a potluck where we all bring items of value to share.

As an interesting, timely, & somewhat related aside, note this news today where people are going to what I'd consider a lot of trouble, just to extend WiFi by 200 feet: o BYU researchers extend WiFi range by 200 feet with a software upgrade

Notice that the EnGadget guys explain what levels people go to in order to extend WiFi range, by 67 meters "beyond the range of standard WiFi".

Here's the lion's share of the proposal... (verbatim to the post end)

"But researchers think there might be another way: a software protocol that extends the distance connected devices can send and receive WiFi by more than 60 meters.

The researchers, led by Brigham Young Unviersity, have dubbed the protocol On-Off Noise Power Communication (ONPC). While WiFi typically requires speeds of at least one megabit per second to maintain a signal, the ONPC protocol can maintain a signal on as little as one one bit per second. That's one millionth of the data speed typically required.

The protocol does this by allowing WiFi-enabled devices to send wireless noise as well as data. According to BYU, it allows the device to send a series of 1s and 0s, essentially turning on and off its signal in a specific pattern. That's enough to tell the WiFi router that the device is still transmitting something (even if no data is being received) and maintain the signal.

"It's basically sending 1 bit of information that says it's alive," says Professor Neal Patawri of Washington University in St. Louis.

When put to the test, the ONPC protocol allowed the researchers to extend the range of an off-the-shelf device 67 meters beyond the range of standard WiFi."

<snip>

Well, first off Ubiquiti are (mostly) 24vdc devices. There are a few cases where they have gone to 48V (AirFiber) but, by and large, they are

24vdc. So if you've got a 12v battery you'd have to step it up to 24v with a converter. Not the best way to do things, but it will work. Just don't cheap out and use some piece-of-shit Chinese junk.

There are some devices that will work with as low as 9v, but that's not a good idea as the lower voltages are less efficient and cause extra stress on the device. You can burn out electronics just as quickly with low voltages as you can with high voltages. Well. maybe not as quickly.. but it can damage them eventually.

Well, a 50 amp-hour battery is 1 amp for 50 hours or 50 amps for 1 hour. So.. 50 hours. I wouldn't suggest more than a 50% draw on a deep cycle, so figure a full day (24 hours). I don't know shit about RVs so maybe RV batteries are bigger than that.

I concur with that conclusion.

<snip>

I carry a tripod in my truck. If I'm at all "iffy" about setting up internet at a customer's house, I use the tripod to try it out. If I can get a decent signal using the tripod, then I know I'm good to go once I get the dish up on the roof.

And that's a problem. 1 or 2 dbm more than ideal is all you need. It's a logarithmic scale. 27 dbm isn't a little bit more than 26 dbm. It's a LOT more.

20 dbm = 100 milliwatts 21 dbm = 125 milliwatts .... 26 dbm = 398 milliwatts 27 dbm = 501 milliwatts

See where this is going? You're saying you'd bump it up a dozen? Well, lets use 20 dbm as a baseline and increase it by a dozen:

20 dbm = 100 milliwatts 32 dbm = 1,584 milliwatts (1.584 watts)

I hope I need not explain the issue with your "headroom"

On 10/22/19 11:39 AM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote: <snip>

I suspect that's exactly what it would do... And maybe we finally have a legitimate reason for the 3dbm setting in the config file.

Well, there's more to it than just plugging it in and instantly extending the range.

For one, you need to configure it. LAN settings.. WAN settings.. You're gonna need to disable AIRMax, which is on by default. You need to set your WPA2 password/phrase and you, most certainly, need to set an SSID.

And you really, really, should adjust the transmit power to an appropriate level so one isn't another RF asshole blasting noise far beyond what is needed. If you want better WiFi and you live in a tract home, then setting the transmit power to 28dbm is a dick move.

If you live in the middle of Montana and there's not another house for

10 miles, and you'd like max coverage, then maybe 28dbm is appropriate.

Failing to do the above with a 2.4GHz device should be a capital crime. there's only 3 non-overlapping (at 20MHz) channels.. Your neighbor picking up your signal at full bars means you've just f***ed him out of being able to use one of those three. Three neighbors can make wifi miserable for all involved.

Thanks Johann for confirming that it would probably work just fine to plug a spare omni PowerBeam horn into a spare switch to instantly add a powerful WiFi access point out of spare parts already lying around such as these I have on my shelf right now:

That's all easy stuff, where I'd assess setting up these devices to be about the same complexity or simplicity as setting up a home router is.

Basically, I've only used two different settings: o When I set it up like this, it's an instant access point:

o When I set it up like this, it's an instant bridge:

As I said many times, we have 40 acre zoning out here, so if you have 79 acres, you can still only build one home on that entire property.

Even so, proper setup is assumed, as there's no indication at this time that anyone wants to set it up any other way, just like when I buy a ski mask, the salesman can warn me once, twice, three times, four times, maybe even five or six or seven times not to rob banks using it.

But after the dozen'th time, the warning gets a bit stale for something that was never gonna happen in the first place.

The good news is that we can easily envision turning a spare switch into a WiFi access point, given that I have tons of spare switches and radios.

What this shows is that re-use is handy when fixing wifi range at home.

Thanks for that information as I was under the impression that these things worked fine with 12 volts to 24 volts, where a quick google confirmed "some" work at 12VDC, e.g., this thread from 4 years ago o 12 Volts for ubnt devices...

Where the OP specifically asked about his 3 devices (2 of which I have): o Rocket M5 (they said it works fine on 12VDC) o Bullet M2 (they said it works fine on 12VDC) o Nanostation Loco M5 (they said it works fine on 12VDC)

But they did advise: "Get a passive PIE injector cable & apply battery voltage to the inputs"

>

Likewise, with this guy who asked about using bullets in a moving car: o Bullet M2 (they said it works fine on 12VDC) o Bullet M5 (they said it works fine on 12VDC) Where they suggested for a car's rather noisy automotive system: "Tycon makes a 12v to 18v poe injector that would likely smooth out the bumps and ripples." Where they guys are pretty experienced at that forum, saying: "Most of these radios will actually work OK down to 7 or 8 volts, which you should never see if the power system of the vehicle is good."

One guy suggested these for people using them in vehicles: o 12 Volt to 24 Volt Passive PoE: Tycon Power Systems TP-DCDC-1224 9-36VDC IN 24VDC OUT, 19W DC to DC Conv.

o 12 Volt to 24 Volt Passive PoE (Gigabit): Tycon Power Systems TP-DCDC-1224G 24V Passive PoE Output Gigabit Injector o Dual 5 Volt USB to 24 Volt Passive PoE: Tycon Power Systems TP-DCDC-2USB-24 USB Powered 24V Passive POE Inserter

For the record, for those contemplating vehicle usage, that thread said:

I don't know anything about RVs either, but that 100 amp battery came up a lot on my searches, so if I assume 100 amps, it could last, in and of itself, for four days, but we'd have to cut that down to have a reserve for starting the vehicle.

Anyway, if the guy wants to, he can run off the battery for at least a day, which may be enough for him to do in between charges (dunno, he's already got to run a ton of other electrical stuff in that RV based on the stuff that I already posted in those "RV Electrical Basics" links.

Suffice to say, it's his choice (if he picks the right devices) o Generator o Inverter o Passive POE

Thanks. I always base my belief system on facts. o If the facts change, I modify the belief system Such that it's always not only based on facts, but bolstered by facts.

It's why adults own rational belief systems after all.

It's nice to know the technique we use is similar to yours.

If we want to test out a location for someone, we bring a tripod and hook up a Rocket (usually) and see what we get.

Sometimes we get a wildly asymmetrical signal (upstream versus downstream), which we've not figured out why yet (a lobe perhaps?) since the WISP is symmetric.

Basically, if the signal is good on the ground, we know it's gonna be good on the rooftop or in a tree, but we try to avoid trees if we can since everyone has a rooftop.

There are a few ways of looking at this, where, I'm sure you're aware, the power measurement in the AirOS report changes greatly at times, easily a handful of decibels, sometimes much more.

Also, there are different applications we're talking about, from bridges, to access points, to mountaintop to mountaintop Internet feeds, etc., where each one is different in the setup and requirements, noise, and channels, etc.

In addition, as you're aware, these are reasonably narrow beam devices for the most part, particularly the mountaintop to mountaintop ones, where they're also set up differently in most cases (e.g., non WiFi for example).

In addition, many are nowadays 5GHz which has more non overlapping channels, which, is why, by the way, I have so much 2.4GHz stuff lying around (as we replace 2.4GHz with 5GHz every time we go up on a roof).

While there are lots of variables, your way of looking at it is fine though, where I'm not saying that the lowest power that works in the given application isn't a good idea, as it is.

I'm not getting into legality. I'm getting into being a good neighbor and being polite. Do you get this?

Where I'm at there are 1,300 acre ranches. That doesn't mean that wifi is going to hit the property-line and stop. Hence my reiterations..

You get someone who lives in Kansas and 40 acres to a transmitter means nothing. That signal may travel for dozens of miles. As I have mentioned before I can pick up the San Onofre Vistior's Wifi signal over

60 miles away. That means I could, if I so chose, attempt to hack a network that is a 2 hour drive away. That's crazy.

The more powerful your transmitter the greater the audience of people who may decide to attempt to penetrate your network. If I can pick up your SSID, that's all I need to being a WPA2 attack.. $50 in Amazon cloud computing time and now I get to use your internet to write death threats to the President. Guess who's door the Secret Service is going to kick in?

I don't care if you think that's an unlikely scenario. Security must be practiced proactively. Reactive security isn't security, it's damage control. There's no reason to expose one's self to threats that one does not need to.

On 10/22/19 10:43 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote: <snip>

<snip>

Continue on with your decibels and painting wifi (or throwing it). I've tired of your inability to want to learn how to be a good spectrum steward and use the proper terminology for the industry. Apparently it's your belief that unlicensed spectrum means you have the moral right to do whatever the f*ck you want with it.

Do the rest of us a favor and switch to the AC line of gear and get familiar with the "automatic power control" button in the UI. This lets the radio decide how much power it needs (and it will adjust on the fly) to maintain a link.

It's clear you're a amateur wireless operator who thinks he's risen to the level of a expert. Unfortunately your posts disprove that. (And for anyone else reading, I'm not claiming I'm an expert, but I sure-as-hell can recognize an amateur when I see one)

You're not doing the newbies any favors. You're starting them off turned in the wrong direction. It's because of clueless asshats that the rest of us are having to move to 24 GHz where you CANNOT interfere with our transmissions no matter how hard you try, through malice or INCOMPETENCE.

Keep "throwing your wifi", I'm throwing you in my kill-file.

I know of several 24 GHz links that is getting trashed by cellular backhauls using the same unlicensed technology. The problem is that getting a PtP link licensed and properly coordinated in a dense urban or mountain top environment is becoming increasingly difficult and lengthy. Service providers want something they can install quickly and 24 GHz currently meets most of the requirements. The interference is coming from other 24 GHz radios that are along the line of sight, or co-located on adjacent rooftops, adjacent towers, or mountain top.

For short hops, the big move is to V-Band, 60 GHz, WiGig, or 802.11ad or maybe the new and improved 802.11ay. What makes these work is atmospheric oxygen absorption. At short ranges, the signal is there. However, put enough distance and air in between endpoints, and the signal drops quite rapidly. 802.11ay will allegedly work to 300-500 meters range under ideal conditions (no rain, no snow, no fog, etc):

"802.11ay WiFi @ 60 GHz (Millimeter frequencies)"

"60GHz Wireless:

MikroTik RBLHGG-60adkit (60 GHz 802.11ad):

MikroTik RBSXTsq-60ad (60 GHz 802.11ad):

MikroTik antennas and range selection:

Ubiquiti has it's equivalent AirFiber 60 product, but it's only available to early access program customers in the US. Some clues in the FCC ID data:

Ignore the Cyrillic and click on the photo for a photo slide show:

So far most of the gear I have come across is rated at 2 miles or less or in a single instance I'm aware of, Ubiquiti's AirFiber 24 can do about 5 miles. I'm not saying you're incorrect, just that I suspect interference will be the exception and not the rule. A cell tower that's trashing someone's link is also probably having it's own link trashed, or at least degraded.

For very short hops. My Mikrotik 60G is rated at a mile. I haven't deployed it yet, but from what i understand if one wants it to punch through rain, then one probably should not exceed 3/4 mile and 1/2 mile might be more realistic during heavy downpours.

<snip>

Everything I'm hearing about 24 GHz has been positive. I don't doubt that there will be some cases of interference, but with WISP gear (I don't know what the cell sites are using) having a 2-5 mile range is a hell of a lot better than the nearly unlimited range of 5 GHz.

Before you go running off about how long a battery with X amp hours will last, you need to be appraised of the facts of life with regard to batteries.

The golden rules of deep cycle batteries are:

Don't flatten your battery.

Don't regularly take out more than 40%.

In case you do flatten or exceed 40% discharge of a deep cycle battery, don't leave it in a discharged state, charge it back up ASAP.

Use the right size and type of charger

Know the settings on the charger and have it on the right setting

Keep the battery on a trickle-charge when not in use

If not maintained on a trickle charger, top up the battery charge monthly.

Failure to follow the above rules will dramatically shorten the life of your battery.

And one more point, a standard lead acid battery, as used in vehicles, etc, should not be regularly discharged more than 20%.

<snip useless diatribe>

Hi Xeno,

Almost everyone who has posted, is very well known to all of us, Xeno.

Thanks for that advice, as you've always been very helpful, and observant of details that many have missed (e.g., the specific tire wear peculiar to mountain roads due to suspension forces related to positive camber which drastically affects the outside edge of front tires).

That's a factual detail that has stood the test of time, which NOBODY else noticed, nor could they explain, until you explained it to the rest of us.

Hence, I have reason to admire your factual acuity, where, in this case, I also respect your judgment, and, in fact, the record shows, we were "almost" as conservative as you suggest, where we assumed 25% of the rated capacity in our calculations (instead of 20%).

It need not be too often stated that most of us (all?) on Usenet are old men, with many decades of experience with automotive batteries (in all sorts of climes around the world).

Thanks for the explanation. o We already calculated at 25% but we can easily adjust down to 20%.

At 20% rated RV battery capacity, the setup will last about 20 hours.

Hi Xeno,

I consider that comment pejorative; and I tell you so. o Rightly or wrongly, there was a reason for what you called a "diatribe".

You may need to understand that I take on the tone of the poster. o It's a tactical technique called "mirroring" implied intent.

The intent is to funnel the poster into being an adult.

It works well with adults. o There is really no technique that works well with trolls

Since, clearly, they posted to this thread many times o Even as they were never once fed.

LOL

UPDATE:

While these devices all come with debugging tools, it's useful to let users know that on Android (but unfortunately not on iOS), there are modern powerful debugging tools that help you debug your WiFi signals:

For example, I just snapped these screenshots of one app in use today:

If you know of any iOS apps that do the same, please let me know: <

>

As it would be nice on the larger iPad screen if such iOS tools existed.

These Android free ad-free tools are useful to test temporary bridges:

With and without the horns attached to the high-gain antennas:

Where it's your choice whether to use the horn alone or in combination with the antenna, which turns the omni horn into a narrow beam WiFi extender:

Which, depending on various factors could be miles of point-to-point range:

(where, as Johann Beretta noted, that screenshot is with AirMax enabled)

Modern WiFi debugging apps are useful when you set up APs at home, where, for example, you can instantly convert a dumb switch to a WiFi AP & then test with your Android phone how strong the signal is around the house:

Or, if you have a spare old router, debug the extension of its range:

Given that laptops are notoriously anemic when it comes to WiFi range.

You can also debug when you add bridge a desktop without WiFi to WiFi

And you can see the difference in range on your phone, when you have both:

Yes, there are already UNIX-like tools inherent in the router software:

But they only work for an individual transceiver (radio & router):

And, they're different software for each transceiver brand:

Where, unfortunately, iOS just doesn't have this modern app functionality:

In summary, when you set up these devices, your Android phone instantly becomes a very useful modern WiFi testing tool, where if you know of any iOS app functionality on the Apple App Store that does the same thing, please let me know as I've looked in vain for years on end for such modern app functionality to exist on my much larger screen iPads.