Wireless for RV campground - Page 3

Have a question or want to start a discussion? Post it! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
Re: Wireless for RV campground
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 20:53:09 -0800 (PST), westom1@gmail.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Right!   Numbers are everything and the only way to tell the
difference between quality and crap.  Numbers are difficult to find
and may be inconsistent.  The best I've found are on
SmallNetBuilder.com.  For example, the WAN->LAN thruput for various
wired and wireless routers:
<http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com_chart/Itemid,189/
For thruput, they use:
<http://www.ixchariot.com
which I can't afford to buy.  However, I get similar numbers using
Iperf and Jperf:
<http://openmaniak.com/iperf.php
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/iperf>
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/jperf>

Unfortunately, there are some numbers that are useless.  Most router
vendors don't bother supplying the measured receiver sensitivity.
There are plenty of reasons for this, but I don't wanna get into
minutiae.  They just copy the numbers from the chipset vendor.  One
exception is D-Link, which has apparently actually measured their
products:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/rx-sens/receiver%20sensitivity.htm
Note the wide variation in values.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Demand?  I recently screwed up and left the speed at one of my coffee
shop customers locked at 5.5Mbits/sec (on a 3Mbit/sec DSL line).  I
think it was like that for at least 3 months before I noticed the
problem.  Absolutely nobody complained, demanded anything, or expected
anything better.  My customers ask me about the latest technology and
buzzwords which they read in the trade magazines and online, but
rarely "demand" any of them[1].  In my opinion, the trick is to supply
the best that is necessary to do the job, but no more.  It's the added
acronyms, features, and functions that seem to cause me all the
problems.

For example, some missing numbers in this exercise are:
1.   What maker and model equipment already exists?
2.   How many users per access point?  How many ACTIVE users per
access point?
3.   How many access points to cover the area?
4.   Any existing wireless networks in the park?
5.   Do you have line of sight to all the camp sites?  If not, what's
blocking the signal?
6.   Tell me about the existing CATV system?  Is it owned by the
campground owner or the cable company?  If locally owned, is it a star
or bus topology?  Is star, can each leg be isolated to provide
individual feed?  
7.   Does the CATV coax live in conduit?  If so, how big?  Do you have
room for gel filled CAT5?  If so, you don't need or want wireless.
8.   What level of service are you planning to offer?  For example, if
you're going to offer 1Mbits/sec per user for 100 users with 10%
loading, you'll need a dedicated 10Mbit/sec backhaul.  A cable modem
can do this, but there are restrictions on reselling the bandwidth.
9.   What's on the trailer/campsite hookup?  Room for a built in
bridge or switch?
10.  Are there any financial or budgetary limitations?  There always
are, but in this case, it might depend on what the campground charges
for the internet access.
11.  Who's gonna adminstrate this system?  With 100 potential users,
you have the equivalent of a small ISP (internet service provider).
You'll need all the traditional facilities normally provided by an
ISP, such as billing, administration, support, traffic monitoring,
abuse detection, abuse mitigation, installation, and troubleshooting.
Actually, running a WISP is more difficult than a traditional ISP in
that you also have a rather unreliable method of delivery.  One leaky
microwave oven will kill the whole system.  Also, who's gonna answer
the phone when a customer can't connect at 2AM?



[1]  The exception are government and educational institutions.  It
takes so long to get funding and approval that they tend to specify
technology that is well ahead of the state of the art.  By the time
the system is actually purchased, the specified products are usually
commodity items.  I recently commented on a skool system that
specified 10GigE, which is currently unobtainium.  They're guessing 4
years to purchase, which is about right.

--
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

Re: Wireless for RV campground
On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 18:33:18 -0800 (PST), westom1@gmail.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it
which is fine. So the advice now is not "go and buy n compatible
hardware" but "go and buy n compatible, with support for both 2.4 and
5 GHz, and with dual radios" so both run simultaneously.

anyhow - Jeff does this for a living so has answers based on more
experience than i do.

The more general point i wanted to make is about "latest spec" does
not automatically translate into "better for the job" - you should
really see what the flip side might be before deciding.

the bit we have all ignored is that "n" hardware right now means at
least 1 mandatory upgrade - so if the box is up a pole it needs to be
easy to do that without physical access.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

my experience has been that backward compatibility even within a
single manufacturers range is not a given (where they have a fighting
chance of understanding how all the tin works).

This happens even with "professional" networking tin, and without
wireless being involved..

So i get a bit sketical about testing for a standard that isnt
published yet.

All that worry about future compatibility is, well, how
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Agree here - wire up the place where you can.
Ducts if possible so if you need something different you can pull new
cable types.
--
Regards

stephen_hope@xyzworld.com - replace xyz with ntl

Re: Wireless for RV campground
wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yeah, something like that.  Actually, I get most of answers from many
years of experience doing everything from RF design to supporting
installed systems.  The problem is that I only see the systems that do
NOT work.  I'm sure there are wireless systems out there which are
installed, work out of the box, do everything expected, never needs an
upgrade, and never does anything unusual.  These may exist, but I
never get to see them.  Everything I see is presumed to be broken or
defective.

Time for a rant.  My opinion of 802.11n is far from complimentary.
I'll skim the highlights and leave out the politics (for now):

1.  The standard mixes spatial diversity and beam forming
technologies, which are two radically different technologies.  In many
cases, the customer doesn't have a clue which they need or are using.
Some even do both:
<http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/wireless/ps5678/ps10092/white_paper_c11-516389.html>
<http://www.theruckusroom.net/2009/01/cisco-validates-smart-wifi.html
The problem is that spatial diversity requires a compatible 802.11n
client radio.  Beam forming will work with anything.

2.  Most of the customers that have 802.11n router eventually have me
disable the spatial diversity feature and just use it for 802.11g.
That's because at any distance beyond a room or office, the 802.11n
error rate is so high, that the router reverts back to 802.11g speeds.
You can watch it happen by monitor the client connection speed.

3.  802.11n is all about speed, not range.  However, that won't stop
companies from publishing irreproducible test results and graphs
showing the 802.11n does increase range.  For example:
<http://www.xirrus.com/pdfs/Tutorial_802.11n.pdf
on Pg 8 shows a graph of range versus rate for a/b/g/n.  It would
appear that at long range, "n" still works.  However, that's not the
way it works or is shipped.  What happens is that when the error rate
drops below the threshold where the retransmissions slow the
connection down to below 802.11g speeds, the access point just
switches to 802.11g and disables "n".  The graph shows the connection
speed, not the actual thrupt.  The lack of speed units of measure
should be an obvious clue.  Xirrus even dumped the graph in their
tutorial on wireless range at:
<http://www.xirrus.com/pdfs/Tutorial_Range.pdf
<http://www.xirrus.com/library/
Despite this issue, the Xirrus tutorials, wall charges, and webinars
are well worth reading.  The product is also very interesting, but is
far too expensive for my typical customers.

4.  802.11n is a win in one respect.  It minimizes the air time used
to move a given amount of data.  Therefore, more users can share the
same air time.  The faster the traffic moves through the air, the more
users a system can handle.  Visualize a coffee shop with one user
stuck on 1Mbits/sec 802.11b.  In the same time that this user takes to
download some amount of data, a 54Mbit/sec 802.11g connection can
download 54 times as much.  With 802.11n, possibly 300 times as much.

5.  Outdoor use of the spatial diversity type of 802.11n is a waste of
time.  That's because the distances involved make the possibility of
using reflections to improve speed somewhat dubious.  Spatial
diversity bonds multiple streams, with different propagation times.
You'll find those in the typical highly reflective indoor environment,
but not so much outdoors.

However, beam forming type of 802.11n should work nicely outdoors.  If
there's a nearby source of interference, the access point will put a
big hole in the antenna pattern and effectively prevent the
interference from becoming a problem.  At the same time, it increases
the gain in the direction of desired client radios.  For an
interference infested RF environment, beam forming is a good thing.
Too bad some can't tell the difference between an incident and
reflected signal to eliminate multipath.  Also, too bad the antenna
has to be a PCB phased or switched array inside the access point.  One
could install the entire access point on top of a pole, but few
commodity routers a made for this.  In addition, since external
antennas are both forbidden and don't work anyway, it's not possible
to customize the antenna pattern by using sector or directional
antennas.  However, there are beam steering outdoor routers and
antenna systems (who's names I can't seem to find).

6.  The lack of an external antenna connector in all 802.11n is what
kills 802.11n for me in many applications.  I often have to install a
panel or sector antenna in an office up high to customize the
coverage.  

Enough ranting for now.... lunch time.

--
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

Re: Wireless for RV campground
On Jan 24, 8:33=A0pm, west...@gmail.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Ahem. I have a huge one.  N is an indoor home user solution.  As far
as I can tell, they aren't made and don't work for outdoor
applications.    How many pro outdoor CPE panels can you find that use
N?  None or close to none.  How many wireless ISPs are using N?   How
many N AP/Routers have external antenna connectors for a sector or
panel antenna, a grid antenna.  None?

So, if you are willing to go with A or G, you can get one of those
inexpensive outdoor CPE/AP devices for under $100 and concentrate on
getting the signal out there to your users.   Also can use coax
antenna cable, also can use a rootenna style box.  All three are the
kind of solutions a wireless ISP is going to need.  Antennas can be
chosen to meet the needs of the location.

They do not need the N speeds for internet and you can't provide it
anyway.  A is good, but how many have an adapter for A on their
laptop.  I do, but many don't.  G is the answer,  move on to how to do
the backhaul and where to place the antennas.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Agreed, though I'd be thinking of the second and third already.
Trying to use one antenna to do it all may cause you to compromise the
coverage for the area that first antenna can do well.   Might even
consider two directional antennas at the club house each pointing in
different directions.  Then run one cable or try powerline as backhaul
for an outdoor AP further down the line.

Steve

Re: Wireless for RV campground
On 26/01/2009 01:17, seaweedsl wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Enterprise class b/g/n
<http://www.ruckuswireless.com/pdf/ds-zoneflex-7942_ot.pdf


Re: Wireless for RV campground

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Enterprise class price tag:  $1,200 street price.
About $160/year for support from Ruckus.

More a/b/g/n from Xirrus:
<http://www.xirrus.com/products/arrays-80211abg+n.php
Prices run $5,000 to $20,000 each:
<http://www.xirrus.com/cgi-bin/press_releases.cgi?id=205&template=1
Note that all of these are dual band.

Somehow, I don't think the typical RV campground is going to buy one
of these.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558            jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
# http://802.11junk.com jeffl@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com               AE6KS

Re: Wireless for RV campground


Enterprise class b/g/n
<http://www.ruckuswireless.com/pdf/ds-zoneflex-7942_ot.pdf


There ARE out there !     I stand corrected. And it's interesting
possibilities with beam forming.   Anyone install these yet ?  Anyone
spec'ing them in?

At $700 -4 1000each, if he needs three, it will only be $2100-
$3000.    Let's see, that will buy something like 30 -40
Nanostations.

Whereas buying two Nanos ($160) plus a $40 panel antenna for the
existing rig should bring the total radio antenna cost up to $200 for
G.

It comes down to this:  install G, currently used by almost all
outdoor hotspot applications at a cost of approx $200 (assuming three
APs) or future proof by spending over ten times as much.

I suggest that by the time the owners feel any great need for N band
APs, that the prices will have dropped considerably, if the market
even opens up for outdoor N.  Strategically, it's going to be far
cheaper to upgrade at that time than to future proof now.

Install G using directional antennas/ APs.  Plan to upgrade to the
next viable standard (N or whatever) when that standard becomes
commodity.  Not worth the cost to be on leading edge.

Re: Wireless for RV campground
On 03/02/2009 14:55, seaweedsl wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

You would probably need to ask on the wisp forum at dslreports.
<http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp
A couple of people seem to have them but not deployed them as yet e.g WiFi35
<http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20441291



Re: Wireless for RV campground
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Thanks for the heads up, it's nice to know what's out there.    I lurk
over at that forum once in a while, so my question was somewhat
rhetorical.

Steve

Re: Wireless for RV campground
On 04/02/2009 16:23, seaweedsl wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
I frequently lurk there to see what people are using and since the
quantity of the items they use can be high you get a better picture of
the actual performance of the equipment.
This one on the PS2 was interesting.
<http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18661399-Powerstation-2-Anyone-deploying-them-with-confidence



Re: Wireless for RV campground

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I almost lost my lunch when I saw the photo of the antenna:
<http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18734222-
That geometry just can't work.  Reading through the rest of the
article, it seems that most eveyone agrees that it's a bad design.
There's also a comment from "UBNTMike" which reeks of damage control:
<http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18926716-

That was all from late 2007.  Has the antenna been redesigned for the
PowerStation 2?


--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558            jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
# http://802.11junk.com jeffl@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com               AE6KS

Re: Wireless for RV campground
On 04/02/2009 23:16, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
I don't know. The discussion seems to be about the 18dB Panel antenna
model and I haven't seen anything which confirms a redesign. When the
threads stopped on dslreports I browsed the Ubiquiti forums and there
was nothing to confirm it had been redesigned but they did introduce the
PS2-17D with the dual polarity antenna as an option.

<http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20
<http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35
<http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21
<http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=484

rewists on this one mentioned having the 18v and the original PS2 18.
<http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=834

At the time I did try to find an FCC ID for the PS2 to see if there were
any changes registered but looking at my notes I evidently didn't find
it. The Ubiquiti products I could find on the FCC site have a prefix
SWX- although I had some confusion over the "Bullets".






Re: Wireless for RV campground
Quoted text here. Click to load it

A campground my wife and I spend a lot of time at is about this same
size and layout. They have 1 AP at the far end of the campground.
Signal strength is OK even at the far end. The problem is being shield
by other other RVs. My solution is to add an external antenna on a
tall mast. Also there is a problem with it getting overloaded when the
park is at capacity. It seems everybody and his brother wants an
internet connection while camping. If I didnt have to check my email
on account of work I wouldnt bother with it. They finally set up a
covered area where you can sit and plug in your laptop. I think that
was a great solution.

Jimmie

Re: Wireless for RV campground
I found out that the owner of the campground had been talking to the cable
TV provider at the campground.  And they are working on a wired solution, to
each site, using the CATV infrastructure.  He was very secretive about the
whole thing, so I'm not real impressed with them.
I'll probably hear from them again, a year from now, wanting to talk about a
wireless solution again.



Quoted text here. Click to load it

A campground my wife and I spend a lot of time at is about this same
size and layout. They have 1 AP at the far end of the campground.
Signal strength is OK even at the far end. The problem is being shield
by other other RVs. My solution is to add an external antenna on a
tall mast. Also there is a problem with it getting overloaded when the
park is at capacity. It seems everybody and his brother wants an
internet connection while camping. If I didnt have to check my email
on account of work I wouldnt bother with it. They finally set up a
covered area where you can sit and plug in your laptop. I think that
was a great solution.

Jimmie



Re: Wireless for RV campground
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Oh well, as least it stimulated a lot of discussion !

Site Timeline