WiFi deployment. What to use

We are looking for a recommendation on the equipment to use for deploying a WiFi network.

We have a T1 at our location and we only use 512 at most. We are looking at allowing other people in our complex use the internet access, for a small fee.

Anybody have experience with WiFi equipment that they are happy with and is easy to setup. We are on a budget like everybody.

Thanks in advance.

Reply to
Shampoo Store
Loading thread data ...

"Shampoo Store" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:

How many users are you expecting to sign up? How large is your complex? And what is your budget approximately?

Becuase you can use anything from a Linksys Router + custom firmware, to higher end Cisco hardware.

Reply to
Lucas Tam

We have about 50 people, each building has about 15 units and the buildings are about 50' apart.

Thanks for the reply.

Reply to
Shampoo Store

"Shampoo Store" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:

The T1 maybe a problem... A WiFi Access Point (802.11b) can sustain about 5mbps and that would saturate your T1 5x over. So make sure your router or access point has the ability to throttle the connection down to 512kbps.

Since the buildings are 50' apart, do you have the ability to run cabling between the buildings? Depending on the size of these buildingss and the types of walls, 1 access point per building may work... or in another case, you might need 1 access point PER unit!

For something like this... you'll probably need a consultant who can do a site survey for you.

As for equipment, I'll leave that someone else in the group : )

Reply to
Lucas Tam

What in blue blazes are you talking about? If the T1 is slower than the AP, I don't think any throttling is going to be necessary. How do you saturate a 5 meg network with half a meg of bandwidth?

Now you're talking sense.

Reply to
Rôgêr

There is not enough room on the T1 to hold all the potential traffic originated by the wireless network going towards the Internet.

As he said, the *T1* will be saturated.

He isn't.

The traffic going out could be as much as 5-7Mbs, and *that* is going to saturate the 1.5Mbps T1.

Incidentally, to be pedanic, it should never be called "1.54Mbs". It actually will deliver a payload of 1.536Mbps, hence it is commonly rounded off to 1.5Mbps. The raw data rate on a T1 is 1.544Mbps, and saying it is 1.54Mbps suggests the raw rate, not the payload, or framed, rate. Unframed would deliver

1.544Mbps, but nobody in their right mind does that (which is to say, only the US Government orders unframed T1 service).

Besides, it isn't a T1 either! It's a DS1.

(Is that enough pedantry for one afternoon?)

Water pipes are half duplex, and our T1 is full duplex while the wireless network is simplex. In other words, there are *two*

3/4" pipes, not one.

In addition to the 3/4" supply, there is a 3/4" backflow pipe. That 2" pipe has a couple valves and it can drain water from one pipe, or supply water to the other. Obviously the 3/4" supply line won't saturate the 2" pipe... and just as obviously the 2" line *will* saturate that 3/4" backflow line.

Reply to
Floyd L. Davidson

Yes, that means there is room for 3 T1s on that network. Having less than the maximum doesn't saturate it.

I know you mean well, but you really are looking at this backwards. The data stream coming in at 1.54Mbs is not going to get saturated by having

5-7Mbs of bandwidth headroom. If you want to look at the old standby plumbing analogy, this is like saying a 3/4" water supply pipe is going to overload a 2" pipe because the 2" pipe is much bigger.
Reply to
Rôgêr

Okay, I'm starting to see your point of view. However, in the real world that usually only happens when you have everyone trying to use the maximum bandwidth of the T1 at the same time. A full T1 (1.54Mb) can usually feed 50 customers at broadband speeds in real life. This is because out of 50 customers there is likely to be only two or three actively doing a download or upload at the same time, many times it's really only one or nobody doing it. Where this falls apart is primarily in file sharing, where someone can hook up three or four computers to a wireless client and line up a zillion songs to be downloaded on each using PTP. Not only are their downloads eating the bandwidth, all their new songs in their "My Shared Documents" folder are now getting uploaded to other file sharers. Video streaming, VOIP and other applications can be killers too, but in *normal* situations, a T1 will feed a bunch of customers. A little bandwidth management can go a long way when it gets out of hand.

Reply to
Rôgêr

Rôgêr wrote in news:9uudnU_KBePVKrXfRVn- snipped-for-privacy@pghconnect.com:

A T1 = 1.5mbps

802.11b AP = ~5mbps

5mbps / 1.5mbps = 3x

The WiFi network will saturate the T1.

What in blue blazes are YOU talking about?

Reply to
Lucas Tam

Rôgêr wrote in news:IcOdnZViCOhfYrXfRVn- snipped-for-privacy@pghconnect.com:

I think we're looking from different directions - I'm looking it from the direction of the WiFi clients. The WiFi clients will gobble up all the bandwidth on the T1 that there will be nothing left for the OP - hence that is why I said an AP would "saturate your T1 5x over".

Reply to
Lucas Tam

Hi,

I'm not going to join in any hardware discussion/debates, as wifi hardware preferences tends to be -- well, quite subjective -- however, if you are looking for software to act as a "Wifi Gateway" in the future then I can't say enough good things about a program called "ZoneCD". I just started using it recently for an open, neighborly, "hot spot" I have and it has proved to be really cool. Its free (cost and GNU licensed), open source, and Linux based. No Linux knowledge is required though, as it runs straight of a live CD. Just burn it onto a CDR, throw it into any box with two NICs, and it turns that box into a turnkey "Wifi Gateway".

formatting link
Cheers,

-Eric

Reply to
Eric

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.