My D-Link DI-624 can't reach the far end of my house reliably. So I got a DWL800+ to act as a repeater. That gives me plenty of signal strength but I can't connect my two computers with D-Link adapters (one desktop with a DWL-520 PCI card and one laptop with a DWL-G650 cardbus adapter) to the network when the DWL800+ is on. But I can connect my Thinkpad T43. It's driving me nuts and D-Link can't solve the issue.
The drivers are the most recent and the TCP/IP and similar settings are identical on each system. Any ideas?
I couldn't find anything called a DWL800+ but did find a DWL-800AP+ repeater. It comes in Rev A and Rev B hardware, which use quite different RF chips and therefore have a mixed bag of compatiblility issues. Assuming Rev B, there are some notes in the Version 2.00 firmware that implies that some DWL-G650 connectivity issues were fixed.
Yep. Chipset incompatibility along with proprietary (and buggy) protocols and timing used for repeating. It's a common problem that even the same manufacturer can't make all their products work with store-n-forward repeaters. I find it amusing that I can take TWO back to back access points, from almost any random manufacturer, and build a working repeater, but can't do the same with an integrated product.
Note the list of DWL-800AP+ "compatible" access points:
DI-624 is not on the list. Different chipset. It also mentions that the DI-624 was not supported in the earlier 1.30 firmware, but doesn't indicate if that was ever fixed. Looking at the release notes for 2.00, I don't think it was.
Near as I can guess(tm), you're limited to devices that use the TI ACX100 chipset (which is roughly what the "+" means). I'm not sure if the TI TNETW1130 chipset used in some mutations of the DWL-650+ is compatible with the earlier ACX100 chipset. Probably not.
If you absolutely must use a repeater, kindly get one that supports
802.11g and not an 802.11b only unit. If you have money to spend, get
*TWO* ordinary access points (or routers setup as access points), wire them back to back, put them on different channels with different SSID's, and you'll get a guaranteed to work repeater, that can play full duplex and will therefore not slow you down with store and forward. However, at that point, it's probably easier to just run a CAT5 cable and just add an extra access point.
I tried to respond to Jeff once and it didn't take. So here it is again...
Words almost fail me with respect to your knowledge, Jeff. You nailed the issue that has baffled several D-Link techs for many telephone conference hours and took a huge time bite out of my week. I am truly impressed and grateful for your help.
If it's anything like the DWL-G800AP, run screaming. I got a three of them for use where running wires was a real pain, and spent so much time screwing around with them that I finally got a router and hard-wired them. Just completely bizzarre things like "when you roam from the repeater to the AP, the AP hangs and must be power cycled". I've sworn off D-Link products as a result.
This is almost always the right answer. In fact, where at all possible, I recommend wiring desktops, as WiFi has too many posssible problems and interference sources to be very reliable.
I guess that makes up for a few wrong answers and bad guesses. Thanks.
If you really wanna do the repeater thing, WDS (wireless distribution system) was invented for the purpose. However, as before, little of your existing hardware supports the WDS protocol. Oh, just add some future entertainment value, WDS and WPA encryption are usually mutually exclusive. I would run the CAT5 cable and forget the repeater.
I've already noted that I was impressed by Jeff's knowledge and willingness to help. This subsequent post just reinforces that impression. And thanks to William for weighing in with more good insights.
Given the choice, I would certainly be hard wiring. Unfortunately (at least in this context), I own one of the few Florida homes built to withstand whatever nature can throw at it. Part of that construction involves foot-thick concrete almost everywhere. At least I don't panic when each new tropical storm pops up. But running new wiring is not a trivial undertaking.
Ah, I know the problem. Another related problem is that those same walls will stop WiFi signals in their tracks, so you'll need to find coverage patterns and AP or repeater locations that will give you the coverage you want. I hate to suggest it, but attic spaces may give you the best results. The least amount of fun during installation (especially if you have friends with cameras), but the best coverage.
A house I'm helping design will have lots of Cat5 everywhere, with PoE APs in several ceiling spaces, though this is obviously much easier in the design phase...
There has to be wires somewhere. Do you have AC power? Netgear has a wired bridge using HomePNA power line networking: |
are not horribly fast, but do sorta work. If the last few feet of wire are a problem, then they have a HomePAN plus wireless version: |
If you have coax cable for cable tv available, you can dedicate it to a 10base2 (cheapernet) coax cable network. I've done this many times and can supply details if you want. If a dedicated coax cable isn't available, you can share the coax with networking: |
the archives as I've posted some detail on using coax cable in the past.
For short distances, you can also use telephone cable if it's twisted pairs. (If it's not twisted pairs or wires, forget it). If desperate, I've used 25 pair telco bundles for 10baseT ethernet up to about 100ft. It might go farther, but I haven't tried it. You only need two pairs.
I've also used G-Line (Goubau Line) extension between buildings and up towers using insulated clothes line wire and copper roof flashing for the launchers. |
's totally useless for this installation, but I just wanted to throw it in for inspiration.
That's true, but the conduit they use here is the flexible NMT stuff, and pulling new thru a couple of hundred feet of that would be essentially impossible. I'm contemplating hard conduit between hub areas in strategic closets, but conduit to every outlet would be very difficult. Lots to think about, though, thanks!
Concrete does give new meaning to the term "Cast In Stone", though, doesn't it?
Conduit. Put openings in the building that can be used later. I'm sure there are well designed homes from the sixties that have lots of wire pulled for futuristic expansion, but it's not cat5, not coax, and certainly not fibre.