Cutting the wire on a sailboat

Hi, John, and nice to renew your acquaintance (we met in DSL land about 5 years ago...).

So, if I understand you correctly, I should be able to just power up my

2611, connect the honking antenna to it (any merit to connecting the 5.5 ducky I have to the other outlet on the card, the better to see below - or is the 8.5 [with its flat dispersion donut] 60+ feet up strong enough to see right below?), and have it function as a repeater?

That is, I'd see however many shore points there were in range, just by virtue of the bridge? My XP program (or any other, such as the Hawking I use on the higher gain indoor antenna, since it has more info than the XP native one) controlling what point to which I connect, would see that (the available shore points) through the power of the antenna and amplified bridge?

OTOH:

seems to suggest I need not only two wireless bridges (e.g. the two I have already, but both set to bridge, rather than one each AP and bridge), but some other Senao device (not specified as to AP or bridge, but with two bridges shown, I presume AP) and a bluetooth? I'm not aware that the 2611s talk "bluetooth" - but my laptops are Bluetooth equipped - and don't "see" the bridge that way, though I've not done anything to try to make them do so.

Obviously I'm (and the supplier I used is) out of my depth here, or I'd not have started this way. One other correspondent (a HAM) led me down this path, saying the bridge was all I needed, also, but both Senao and Hyperlink (the antenna guys, who also have a 1W amp (but not bridge/AP, and it needs antenna cable, not fed by ethernet, so too short for my mast) tell me it can't be done.

Hm....

L8R

Skip Morgan 461 #2 SV Flying Pig

The vessel as Tehamana, as we bought her

"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." - Mark Twain

[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Why not? That's what a bridge is supposed to do. In other words:

+-------+ +-----------------+ +-----------------+ +-----+

[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

That's not what I said. That would work if and only if the Senao can be used as a wireless repeater, not just an Ethernet-wireless bridge -- those are two different things. What I actually said was:

Those are different boxes:

1. Your Senao connected by Ethernet to
2. an Ethernet-wireless bridge. Plus possibly:
3. A wireless bridge for your computer. The wireless link can be whatever the bridge units support.

It's possible that the Bluetooth on your computer (using Bluetooth networking profile) could be used to connect to an Ethernet-Bluetooth network bridge connected to your Senao by Ethernet (i.e., just one additional device), although I've never tried to do that.

The Bluetooth on your computer is probably Class 2, which only has 10 meter range, so that would only work if you ran an Ethernet cable down the mast and mounted the Ethernet-Bluetooth network bridge in the cabin. Otherwise you'll need Class 1 (100 meter) devices at both ends (top of mast and computer), and you'll need to be careful that your Bluetooth doesn't interfere your WiFi (since they use the same frequency).

Hi, John, and thanks for the note.

So, do you know of any wireless repeaters? As far as my limited knowledge will carry me, that's what I need. However, in looking further in the senao site, I see a 3054etc. which claims to be a repeater.

However, pulling down the specs and the manual, the thing looks identical to the 2611 functionally except it's only 100, not 200, mw, a step backwards, not to mention that none of the literature says anything about repeater function.

What I have now, and which emphatically doesn't work, is two senao units: One configured as a bridge, and, connected via crossover, to the other, configured as an AP, both "wireless" in that they use antennas to talk to the outside world, but ethernet to talk to each other. Unfortunately, as soon as you put the two together, they generate intractible IP conflicts, and no amount of tweaking the IP resolves it. Even worse, without specific IPs, one can't specify which shore point to which it would communicate, because you can't interrogate it (and it's not a passthrough like a repeater would be, allowing my XP or other wifi controller to select which point it wants). However, that's what you seem to recommend (the 2611 AP 2611 Bridge as "repeater") - but I don't see how adding another wireless bridge would cure that - unless you're saying it (the new bridge) should be connected via cat5, in which case, I've not achieved the objective (cutting the cord), anyway.

I don't know that I want to introduce 2 or more additional parts to overcome having to have the ethernet connected - but I can't believe that I'm the only one who wants to do this - effectively the same as wardriving, but with something else between me and the AP, providing lots of oomph, without wires.

I can't imagine the HAM (amateur radio) community manages to make repeaters an everyday occurence, nobody watching, nobody doing anything other than making sure the hardware is powered up and the antenna's still up there, and it works perfectly, and the wifi universe, with orders of magnitude more users, hasn't one...

L8R

Skip, frustrated

[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Example: Linksys WRE54G

or

The apparent problem is that your senao units seem to only be infrastructure mode client devices, connecting to access points, or point to point devices, connecting to each other. In both cases their clients (e.g., your laptop) are wired, not wireless -- they aren't wireless repeaters. So to connect your laptop wirelessly, you need to bridge between the wired network coming out of the senao at the head of your mast and your laptop. For that, you need a conventional wireless access point (not a router) to bridge your laptop to the wired network. Better diagram:

+-------+ mast +--------------+ +-----------------+

Hi, John, and thanks for the thoughtful response. Leaving the discussion below for the other group, and trying desperately to formulate my question/where I'm stuck :{)) properly:

Hoping not to be redundant, the wired (through my RJ45 NIC, with the wifi card disabled) bridge seems to work with its antenna (the external hi gain on an N connector with a pigtail to the card). However, I want to avoid the wire (at least to my laptop). So, the (non-working) provided setup is 2611 as AP (web-based setup) to crossover cable to 2611 as Bridge (web...). It's there that the conflicts occur if I try to assign them IPs so I can interrogate them. As both have antennas which are way overkill for anything close by, but, common sense tells me, should work at close range, too - and, in reality, this has never left the bench, as it doesn't yet work as I want it to - I had assumed that I could look at either one of them with the appropriately classed IP in my wifi (vs DHCP). However, IP conflicts rendered the setup dead when the IPs were set in them individually, and then they were XO'd together. Without the IPs, I can't interrogate, and therefore can't select which of however many shore points might be found, as all my wifi card sees is the AP, with whatever name I give it (but not seeing the bridge, or individual shore points, though it will connect if DHCP in all regards).

So, I think your diagram is what, in fact, I'd been trying to build. The bridge was expected to talk to the outside world and pass info over the XO to the AP, which would talk to me (and, presumably, anyone else who cared to come aboard, or nearby). The bridge has been configured in both P-P and P-MP, to no avail (against the IP conflicts when both are together).

Having bought them both, I'd sure like to be able to make them behave like a repeater. I wasn't smart enough to ask for that when I got suckered by the vendor after explaining what I wanted to do. However, if I have to start over with some device already made to do that, I'm assuming one can pass signal through an amplifier immediately to hand, and get the gain I'd attempted here (200mw, 8.5dBi). Am I correct in that? I see amplifiers all the way to a full watt, so presumably I'd have not only plenty of power, but plenty of range.

Related, but not directly to the direction this has been going, in my additional reading, I've discovered an area which might be fruitful. Do you think that changing channels (both default to 6, which is also the case in my internal wifi card) might change the outcome (IP conflicts, unaddressable units)? As the gear is currently in a storage building (I'm in the middle of more pressing issues related to our leaving at the moment), I can't just hook it up to verify, but I *assume* it can be changed. However, as I mentally look at the URL screens in my memory, I don't specifically see a box around the "6" so perhaps I'm stuck. However, if you believe that to be a worthwhile change, I'll do it.

As I've spent many days in troubleshooting this, many hours of which, over many telephone conversations, included the vendor, I have a fair grasp of what *doesn't* work :{/)

L8R

Skip, in study for HAM licensing

Here I am again :{))

Is there any reason to run wire (cat5 XO) up the mast, instead of a pigtail between the two units, a few inches long, both in the same NEMA (weatherproof) enclosure? The AP has a 5.5dBi duck (to talk to my laptop), and the P-MP Bridge has an 8.5dBi Hyperlink 20" stick (to talk to shore). And, to the AP, perhaps what I need, inferred from your above, is actually two bridges? One to talk to shore, the other to me? I could set the IPs to, e.g., 192.168.10. (101 and 102) and interrogate them if I had my wifi as

192.168.10.10 (same subset mask in all cases)? And, somehow, despite my widely variant previous attempts (i.e. 15.15.15. or 10.10.10 sets), I'd avoid the IP conflicts I've gotten so far when I plug the two together with the crossover?

I have to admit not having tried two bridge configurations. The vendor asserted I'd need both, so that's the path we've been going down and continually mugged in. As you can tell, I'm pretty ignorant about networking, which likely gets me in trouble. However, I believe that my AP (and maybe bridge) setup can act as host. Actually, that's sorta what I had in mind - while I get the shore point with high power, any other cruiser nearby could use the same signal I'm getting (that's assuming we can work out this little equipment problem!). My duck should provide a wide enough signal to cover the nearby boats in an anchorage; if they couldn't see the shore, they could see my duck.

"Bridge" is the 2611 unit configured in P-MP bridge mode. The other 2611 (with the duck) is configured to be AP. The web-based configuration can toggle between those modes; the bridge lets you specify P-P or P-MP.

Good! Trying very hard to stay on target, too, but thought I was SOL with what I had...

Well, I dunno. In my home D-Link cheapo hub/router, there are two (little, of course!) sticks. One I have vertical, for my office upstairs, and distant points (like my next door neighbor). The other I have horizontal, for folks downstairs and on the deck. Of course, I still have the issue of either a repeater (which I don't need?) with an amplifier, or the two 200mw units which currently, at least, don't talk to each other or play nice (at least not so one can specify which shore point to communicate with).

And, my setup would be weatherproof. If I could get just one of these units to behave like a repeater, since they are actually a laptop card in a breadboard base (enclosed in a housing for usual use indoors, but also available as a module, as I have them), and have two antenna outputs, I suppose I could put the duck on one and the stick on the other. (Both antennae have the appropriate short pigtail to the card[s].) But, back to your premise, yes, that's exactly what I was trying to do. Power the units directly (vs 12V wallwarts) with the appropriately sized (to avoid voltage drop) wire inside the mast, but have it wireless otherwise, in a weatherproof enclosure with two antennae sticking out of it, the duck horizontal below, and the stick vertical above.

So, summarizing, I don't need to fiddle with the channel settings. I don't need a repeater or amp. I just need an AP configured in host bridge mode, talking to my bridge?

Thanks.

L8R

Skip

[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Since your laptop apparently has builtin Bluetooth, and since speed probably isn't an issue, you might want to consider a Bluetooth access point; e.g., , which would even allow you to print wirelessly.

What you're trying to do will only work if the lower 2611 can be configured as a *host* access point in bridging mode to which your laptop wireless client can connect. IP addresses shouldn't be an issue (as long as the two 2611's have manually-configured different addresses on the same subnet) -- bridges (unlike routers) are transparent to network traffic.

You need to be more precise -- I don't know which unit "bridge" refers to.

Repeater isn't what you need. See below. "Stay on target, Luke, stay on target!" :)

That would mean a weather-sealed repeater at the top of the mast (to avoid a long antenna cable run) with enough power and both enough horizontal gain to connect to shore stations and enough vertical signal to connect to your computer down on deck. I'm not a radio expert, but I don't think that's practical. :)

No.

If you want help in making this work, then take the advice, rather than doing something else. ;)

[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Possible radio interference, although you may be able to avoid that with proper antenna selection. Otherwise, you don't want them to both be on the same primary channel (1/6/11), but that's something dictated by the shore hotspots and is thus out of your control.

Which will radiate all over the place. I think you may need a directional antenna facing down.

Please read what I wrote, and stick to what I said. I don't have the time to do it your way and/or chase down blind alleys.

That should work *if* the lower (local) unit is bridging. The first step is to make sure that your laptop can connect to the lower (local) device, and then to see if it's properly bridging traffic to the upper (remote) device.

I have no idea what kind of problems you've actually run into. With bridging and different manually configured IP addresses, there shouldn't be any IP address conflicts.

Not if your two devices are on the same channel and conflicting with each other.

Please stick to upper (or remote) and lower (or local). That sounds like upper (or remote).

That sounds like lower (or local).

And you might be -- I don't know what your gear will or will not do.

Now you're a network expert? ;)

That's just diversity, not some sort of radio relay. Different network topology -- those are all clients on one network, not clients bridged to a short hotspot.

[sigh]

Don't restate anything -- just follow what I said (wrote).

No offense, but you're making this more complex, confusing, and difficult than it needs to be. FIRST TRY what I suggested, NOT something else. Come back if you STILL have problems. Or do your own thing entirely.

as the bridge and connect to another cb3 in access point mode via a

Thank you, Jeff, for an informed opinion. I'm not at the same site as the equipment (it's in the storage building where the other stuff going to the boat is at the moment). So, particularly since this week is chock-a-block with medical stuff related to my ability to leave, it will have to wait until next week. However...

I'll try setting one of the units to CH1, the other to 11, both of them on the 10 set net, and adding another custom net of the 10 class to my DHCP enabled wifi internal.

Of course, I'd far rather make what I have, having already spent the bux toget them, work, so this is encouraging. In particular, with two 200mw units, one for each end's activity, it surely seems that I'll have great coverage. However, I'm curious as to why a repeater wouldn't work - or, were you referring to *adding* a repeater to what I have as not working?

Finally, as originally configured, these were two modules (no cases, but the breadboard allowing the PCMCIA card to operate outside the computer), separated by standoffs, in the same weatherproof housing, with the 20" stick out the top on a lightning arrestor/protector and the duck out the bottom, both powered by house (12V DC, nominal) power. Do you see any problems with this arrangement?

I'll report back when I've attempted your setup.

Thanks again.

L8R

Skip