Wireless for RV campground

View your posting in microsoft.public.windows.networking.wireless entitled "Wireless outdoors".

Dedicated ethernet connections means routers with ports for every user AND (as defined by the app note in that other newsgroup) a protector for every wire in each cable to each user. And each cable must be exterior grade.

Wireless APs are your best solution. With additional wiring so that more APs may be installed, if load demands, by scattering more APs throughout the campground.

Don't waste money on the cheap from tigerdirect. Good reasons why better equipment is cheaper by costing more money. Your AP should also include 802.11N (not just B & G).

Increasing AP power will do little if the WiFi user's power is also not increased. Wifi is a bidirectional conversation. Increasing power on one side does not mean the other side can be heard.

If they really want internet provided, then a narrow (4 inch) trench across the road to install multiple pipes (one for the internet =96 others for future reasons =96 electric or other) is trivial and easily patched.

I'm on the fence. The coax cable goes directly into the trailer hookup. It would be easy enough to attach yet another box to deliver internet. However, there's always a catch or three. MoCA was intentionally designed to limit the number of attached bridges to prevent users from setting up their own cable ISP. For the same reason, CMTS boxes and PC based emulators are expensive and hard to find. However, the big problem is theft. If you give|loan|rent yet another box to the customer for multiplexing the CATV and internet/ethernet, then they're going to drive away with it, destroy it, lose it, or otherwise make life miserable for the park owner. Unless the bridge were built into the trailer hookup, there's gonna be trouble. Of course, wireless doesn't have this problem, so it might be the preferred choice. Toss a coin.

I've been doing this for longer than I want to admit. I've noticed that I can only deal with a relatively narrow range of IQ's and abilities. Clients that are totally clueless, generate far too much aggravation for me to tolerate. Clients that are power users, who only call me when they've created the computer equivalent of the Gordian Knot, are also time burners. Fortunately, there are a sufficiently large number in between these extremes to support my decadent and lavish lifestyle. To the best of my knowledge, all of my clients and customers can operate an AC plug.

Hint: If you have CATV coax, you probably also have conduit. Run CAT5 and be done with it.

Surely "N" only matters if the extra bandwidth is useable.

Unless there is a big internet pipe, then N is going to be irrelevant, since the internet feed will be the bottleneck.

The speed mismatch only gets worse as more APs are added and the aggregate wireless throughput for the site increases.

Finally - the "N" standard is due end 2009, so what you really mean right now is "some manufacturers idea of what might be in the 802.11N standard when we finally get it, and yhey burned into a chip set so that it at least part of it is frozen and cannot be changed later".

And without a standard that cannot have been tested yet for compatability with other "N" kit.....

If speed was important, than any 802.11 standard was more than fast enough. 802.11 means access to additional frequencies. That means more users operating longer distances and the laptop has more choices to find a frequency that best works for that motorhome.

And finally, 802.11N type hardware has already been available for one year. It that hardware does not comply with the 802.11N standard, then a free software download upgrades that 'N' hardware.

The AP should do 802.11 B G & N for numerous reasons.

Nope - 802.11 b / g use 2.4, a uses 5 GHz. "n" can use 2.4 and 5, but that is not mandatory in the standard.

A lot of "draft" hardware seems to be 2.4 GHz only, so no real gain unless you pick the ones with 5 GHz or hardware with dual band radios.

So saying "n" is not enough.

this link gives the 2007 spec for draft 2

If you have 5 GHz only "n" (or configure a dual band that way), then any client with non 5 GHZ hardware of any standard doesnt get a link.

G uses better modulation and b to get more from the same amount of frequency band, so you still get 3 mostly non overlapping "lumps".

But the go faster "n" modes eat up more of the available space, so fewer non overlapping channels, or "n" degrades a lot to share frequencies with the older standards.

That means

You only get lowest common denominator, so unless the client is "n" and actually interworks, then you get G or just "b" mode.

the track record of "draft" equipment being upgraded to full release by a firmware upgrade is not good.

something in writing that says "commitment to upgrade mandatory", and "subject to published standard successful test by appropriate accredited 3rd party" "replacement with compliant hardware on test failure" is what i would write into a spec at work - but with just a couple of devices or consumer stuff it will be impractical to make that stick.

i think backward compatibility is supposed to be part of the standard, so fine.

Maybe the most important bit coming out of this is to actually test it when installed with a range of clients (preferably more than several at once, mixed on different standards) just to see what works in practice.....

see page 12 for the details of the modes, and the potential speeds, and the comment about "draft devices implement most of the standard"....

note devices can be 2.4 GHz only, 5 only or both.

And that only supports exactly what I said. The AP point should support 802.11 B G and N. There are zero reasons for not doing so. The additional frequencies are just some of the many reasons why the AP should also support N. Any reputable manufacturer will include separate transceivers for both frequencies.

Backward compatitiblity, etc are all irrelevent to the OP since that happens automatically with 802.11 N hardware. OP's AP should support

802.11 N. All that worry about future compatibility is, well, how many times is hardware out there and working just fine both before and after the standard's final version is released? USB, Firewall, Bluetooth, Zigbee... we've been through this too many times without problems. Just get the AP point that supports 802.11 N from a reputable manufacturer. Not cheapest hardware sold by tigerdirect. 802.11 N hardware increases reliability now and in the future. And eliminates potential problems that need not even be discussed here.

Meanwhile, prewire other locations for additional APs should reliability make them necessary. Best is a dedicated AP connection each back to the central router. One AP now. More installed as experience proves the need.

Permit me to supply a reason for not doing so. Enabling 802.11n modes disables the 802.11b mode. That's because of the huge amount to time required to aquire (long preamble) an 802.11b packet. If 802.11b were left enabled, the time left for 802.11n traffic would be so small as to negate the speed improvements. The manufacturers could have eliminated the 802.11b compatibility mode, but since it's already in all the 802.11g chipsets, and there are marketing reasons for leaving

802.11b in the product (customers using the router with 802.11n disabled), 802.11b is always present.

Not really. As I previously noted, enabling 802.11n mode (in a spatial diversity MIMO style 802.11n router), disabled 802.11b. He could also disable 802.11g and just run 802.11n for additional speed improvements.

When 802.11g first arrive, there was flurry of Windoze and driver updates to "fix" various timing and incompatibility issues. The same things happened when WPA was introduced, and again with WPA2. I still have client radios that will not work with some AP's running WPA2-AES despite Wi-Fi alliance certifications of each (seperately). Various tests on SmallNetBuilder.com of various Per-N harware have demonstrated that universal compatibility is seriously lacking and that stuff that works, may not work as well as advertised or expected. You can assume that all 802.11n devices are compatible, but lets just say that one should also expect some rough edges.

USB 1.0 to 1.1 conversion was rough. Lots of devices just wouldn't work. I'm not convinced that all USB 2.0 really do work with 1.1 and certainly not 1.0. The new and improved prototype USB 2.1 headset I received refuses to recognize BT profiles that worked with my USB 2.0 stereo headset. Lots more if I want to dig through the notes. Perhaps you went through these transitions without seeing any problems, but my customers and I did not.

That's not going to work either. Most reputable and disreputable manufacturers buy their wireless devices from contract manufacturers in China, Taiwan, and elsewhere. It's not unusual for competing products to have identical guts with slightly different firmware. It's also not unusual for a reputable manufacturer to have multiple mutations of the guts from various sources. Linksys WRT54G is a good example with about 9 different board variations, all radically different. The problem is that without knowing something about the guts, it's very difficult to judge a router by it's cover, manufacturer, or their reputation.

That also might be a problem. One should plan the deployment of AP's so that they don't overlap coverage and frequencies. For really dense installation or a central pole mount, I suggest sector antennas. There's also the problem of leaving channels open for the residents to use for their own wireless routers. Otherwise, one gets lots of mutual interference. You can't install AP's at random. Intel had a nice guide for deployment and channel selection. Archived at:

Well worth reading, studying, or just skimming.

Have we been told what the expected broadband connection is ? aka - a 1meg DSL line ?

Nope. However, we do know that there's CATV in the park. It would seem possible that it's a faster cable modem. It would be interesting to know the TOS (terms of service) for the backhaul.

Lots of other detail is missing, such as how is this going to be administrated, bandwidth management, login/passwd?, logging, abuse detection, abuse mitigation, etc. Basically, running an RV campground wireless, with up to 100 connections, is almost exactly like running a wired ISP, with the added bonus of a marginally reliable method of delivery. I've covered this several times in the distant past, so a Google search should find the details.

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.

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

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

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:

The problem is that spatial diversity requires a compatible 802.11n client radio. Beam forming will work with anything.

1. 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.
2. 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:

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:

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.

1. 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.
2. 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).

1. 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.

"Peter Pan" wrote in news:V4ydnR2k3s-_Z-TUnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.com:

Well, it's not *really* 600 mw. And the built-in antenna is only 10 dBi.

From the data sheet......

In 802.11b mode it is only 27 dBm, or 500 mW.

In 802.11g mode: 6-24 mbps = 26 dBm 36 mbps = 25 dBm 48 mbps = 23 dBm 54 mbps = 22 dBm

IIRC, 36 dBm is the magic number. So it's only (barely) not legal in

802.11B mode, by 1 dBm.

By looking a the data sheet....all other modes are legal.

Meanwhile, that was a type of problem seen by the many who bought the AP from tigerdirect - who buy based on price like a beancounter rather than value like an engineeer. The better 802.11 APs even have a 2.4 Ghz transceiver for 802.11 B/G and a separate transceiver for the 5 Ghz 802.11 N.

Meanwhile, one AP installed now. Wiring for additional units in other locations as experience teaches what does work better (location and AP manufacturer) and what is needed for those customers and their reception.

If 802.11 B/G/N wireless worked as some stated, well, that would be how a tigerdirect AP gets sold so cheap and at high profit.

Laptops are made in China. So all laptops are aslo crap? That is the reasoning? It is not who assembles it. It is who sets the standards. Even Cisco routers - the backbone of the Internet - are made in China. But Cisco, Dell, HP, etc define standards. Those standards make the difference between a cheap tigerdirect AP point verses the useful one from Netgear.

Get one 802.11 B/G.N AP from a reputable manufacturer - and don't even look back at all the naysaying in this thread.

Meanwhile, what is necessary for lightning protection and exterior grade cables were discussed elsewhere.

If the campground owner is concerned with a trivial four inch wide cut across the roadway (where multiple pipes are buried for this cabling and future purposes), then he really did not want this anyway.

Perhaps I wasn't too clear. All 802.11n access points disable 802.11b compatibility when in the 802.11n 40Mhz mode. Some also disable WEP encryption (finally) as it's NOT part of the 802.11n spec. These are not a "problem" peculiar to any manufactory or vendor. They all do it. I don't have a copy of the 802.11n spec, but this kinda hints at what's happening:

If you need specifics, I'll dig them out later.

I are an engineer and I buy from Tiger Direct. Over the years, I've seen good deals and absolute junk mixed together in the nifty catalog. My main complaints about Tiger Direct are over the non-functional rebate program and their amazing inability to properly pack the shipping box without having it explode on arrival.

Pardon my ignorance, buy why does having a seperate 5.8GHz radio make the access point "better"? Certainly, it adds a useful feature. However, most dual band clients don't offer any way to differentiate a connection between bands. Some don't even indicate which band they're operating upon. Netstumbler and other diagnostics can't tell the difference between bands. Some access points stupidly force the same SSID on both bands making selection by SSID impossible. DD-WRT and other 3rd party firmware barely works on dual band wireless routers. Wi-Fi finders are all 2.4GHz. One laptop with a dual band radio arrived with 5.8Ghz disabled to save battery power. How does having

5.8GHz make a a wireless access point "better"?

I hope I'm not reading this incorrectly, but if you've only installed this one access point, you're about to have a serious adventure in the reality of wireless. I've lost count of how many I've sold, installed, setup, fixed, tweaked, and otherwise done battle with. If you include client bridges, point to point links, and mfg test fixtures, I would guess several hundred. What's scary is that no two are the same. I could transplant a working system, from one location to another, and get compeletely different performance and reliability. You may discover what works better by experience, but there's no guarantee that this experience is universal or even portable. Best of luck.

Sorry, but I don't understand what you're claiming. Tiger Direct sells fairly current model units from a variety of manufacturers. They do tend to sell the absolute cheapest, but at least they stick with fairly well known brands. They also sell refurbished units and closeouts, which are clearly marked as such. I've bought some of these with rather mixed results.

The major determination in final cost of a commodity access point is sales volume. That's why wireless access points sell for MORE than wireless routers, even though wireless routers have more hardware and more complex development. That's also why wireless game adapters sell for more than both, as the volume just isn't there.

Well actually they are all crap. I also fix laptops. When I get rid of the common cold and drag myself back to my palatial office, I'll post a photo of the rather large number of unrepairable laptops I've been accumulating. Most are failures due to crappy soldering of the BGA (ball grid array) chips. Others fail due to overstressed parts, bad mechanical design, and just plain junk parts. The all too common low-ESR electrolytics with the counterfeit electrolyte is still a problem after about 6 years:

I don't have time to itemize all the chronic failures that I've seen. Let me assure you that most of these failures could have been averted if the laptops were properly designed, used quality components, didn't cut corners, and were a bit more rugged.

I could ask you the same question as to why you decided that since all laptops were made in China, that they were all crap. What I said was that most of the major commodity router manufacturers buy from contract manufacturers in China, Taiwan, Korea, and Japan. They do not manufacture the guts. The vendors change constantly, sometimes without changing the model number. Unfortuantely, quality and reliability vary with these vendors and designs. In order for someone to determine if a specific product is of reasonable quality, one has to know something about what's inside the plastic box. Is that sufficiently clear?

What standards? For quality? ISO-9000 and such offer a documentation trail so that if anything goes wrong, the appropriate culprit can be blamed. Got any better standards for insuring you get a quality wireless product? Certifications?

I guess you haven't seen all the counterfeit Cisco modules and products:

I bought some nifty HP print server cards on eBay, that lasted about a month before they blew. They were counterfiet. The problem is that all this stuff is made in the same factories, by the same people, on the same production line, with the same parts, using the same specifications. The only difference is that little of it is ever tested or burned in. Sometimes, known defective parts are used. The giveaway is that if the factory runs out of parts, they tend to substitute something cheaper. You can see that in the above URL's. If you haven't run into this problem yet, consider yourself lucky. It's an expensive mess. Anyway, a better set of specs isn't going to help much. Destroying the over-runs and failures will help.

I agree. One good wireless router, from whatever constitutes a reputable manufacturer, is a very cheap object lesson in wireless reality. The experience gained in deployment and troubleshooting should compensate for the lack of expertise, experience, and planning. Those can be obtained later in order to patch up the system. I'm serious. Deploy an 802.11n solution and see if it does what you want and if it's worth the money. You'll learn more from the experience than from reading my rants and understanding the naysayers.

Nope. No external antennas allowed (or will work) with most 802.11n access points. You don't need a lightning arrestor if there's no exposed antenna. Maybe an arrestor on the power line entry and LAN cable backhaul.

Nobody does road cuts these days. Too messy and too much work. About $250. See:

The video clip demo is worth watching if you're planning on doing horizontal drilling (to avoid trenching).

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.

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

What are you basing that on? Do you know people that have used that?

When I started researching this, I knew nothing about outdoor wireless, so I started by Googling outdoor wireless. And by far, the most positive customer reviews I came found were on that AP and the D-Link DWL-2700AP.

With electronics, you can't always go by price alone. Sure, there's lots of junk that comes out of China, but there's a lot of quality electronic products too.

this has been an interesting "academic" discussion, and learned a lot as usual -

but back to the simple & real world... For - John.B.

1 - what is your broadband connection & speed - in both directions -

2 - get any WAP that support 802.11B/G - put it up on the clubhouse - don't need a WAN connection - and run around the site with a laptop.... just monitor the signal strength, that will tell you where your baseline best case coverage exists

If that doesn't cut it - it ain't gonna happen inside a trailer -

Next - take the WAP and just plant it around the area, with no connection to a WAN - just some AC, power it up - and do more "site surveying" to see how your WAP can be used to cover the area.

That will give you a starting point - of reality - then you can get back to the academic discussions.....

Quite correct is that price says little. The cheapest unit often ends up costing the most. Some expensive units can also be crap. If price really measured value, then GM, whose products are designed using cost controls, would not be losing money on every car.

Reviews are a good place to start. However which reviewer actually knows why things do and did not work? Better is to start with a long list of numeric specifications. From spec comparisons becomes obvious some specific differences. Some hardware selling on price simply will not provide important numbers. Then go back to those reviews. Which reviews discuss these differences? That may weed out about half those reviews. Useful reviews will typically discuss many items that Jeff has listed - and with numbers. No numbers? Ignore that review.

Your system must support 802.11 B G and N. That is what future customers will demand. Other advantages means your access point has more channels AND can will work flexibly around interference and other connection problems. For example 802.11 B & G really only provide three overlapping channels AND are routinely interfered with by portable phones, microwave ovens, and water. Even wet leaves create problems not found indoors. 802.11 N means additional channels at completely different frequencies, better solutions to interference problems, less problems with loss of signal due to other problems such as propagation (ie ghosting), and other advantages current and future. 802.11N provides higher speed only because it is less resistant to radio frequency problems. Problems that may be most severe in a campground are interference, blocked, and reflected signals. Problems that hardware can make less problematic by using N technology - which is also what your future customers will be using.

If an experienced installer also with technical knowledge, then maybe find a discounted AP sold by tigerdirect that has value. But tigerdirect customers are often seeking discounts only on price. Can you identify rare value in that discount brand name? Best is to start with an AP from known industry benchmarks. Then buy from tigerdirect only if they also provide it. Don't select because tigerdirect sells something at a better price - as so many make the mistake of doing. But I gather, only from your last post, that you plan to avoid that mistake.

Still unknown is what your loading will be. Can one access point support 100 users because rarely are more than 10 users on at any time? How many actual users will be leasing IP addresses? You will have maybe 100 such questions to answer or to eventually learn the hard way. You don't need additional surprises from discounted hardware.

Plan APs where best located (with cables or tubes for future network expansion) to reduce the number of surprises that will inevitably occur later. Also learn of important wiring considerations posted in that other newsgroup.