Brian Deacon wrote:
Clearly, I'm just not keeping up, because yesterday was the first I
heard of 802.11n.
It's not a standard yet, so don't go buying any hardware that has the N
label stamped on it just yet. It could change. And when it does, the
stuff that's currently on the market will have a nice black eye because
it won't work with the real stuff that does support the standards. Gotta
love it when manufacturers jump the gun!
Anywho, my neighbor and I are in-laws, which provides unique
opportunities for cooperation. They had previously piggy-backed on my
DSL connection by having their wireless card get on my WAP. But the
distance was right on the edge of usability for them, and they
eventually broke down and got their own DSL. And now we're all nice and
compliant with our Terms of Service.
Better is to use a high-gain antenna on your side and position it such
that you get maximum coverage. That is, put it as high as you can get
it. I have vaulted ceilings in my living room, and have my WAP mounted
to the wall at the apex of the ceiling. I also have a high gain omni
antenna. I can get wireless signal from my house at the park down the
street. :)
But back to violating the TOS. I'm envisioning both of us getting these
"802.11n" WAPs, and pooling our internet connections, so that we each
get double-speed when we're using it alone.
That's all fine and dandy, and you can set it up to do load sharing per
packet on your end ... but it's not going to work how you think it will.
The problem is, the other side of that connection also has to be set up
for load sharing, and you can bet your paycheck that the ISP has not set
it up that way for just that very reason -- they don't want people doing
this. Not to mention the fact that because of how most consumer DSLs
work (PPPoE), this implementation is impossible. You'd have to bond the
two DSLs at layer 2 then run MLPPPoE over the bonded pair -- this is
something that just cannot be done. Especially so since you'd be
bridging one of the two DSLs over 802.11. The two lines would need to
terminate into the same device; that is, both DSLs would have to connect
to your router. I don't know of a piece of equipment that can do this.
Even the expensive Cisco gear that can, in fact, accept two DSL boards
won't allow the bonding to be done at layer 2 becuase it's just not a
supported topology. But DSL's technical merits (or shortcomings, as the
case may be) aside, here's how you would want to do it:
(make sure you view this with a fixed-pitch font).
your house neighbour house
dsl--linux box--802.11 bridge < < < ----- > > > 802.11 WAP/bridge--dsl
|
switch--WAP/higain < < < < < ------- > > > > > > 802.11 clients
| < < < < < ------- > > > > > > 802.11 bridge
wired network
|
wired network
With consumer gear this will be *very* difficult, at best.
the linux box will require three ethernet interfaces: one to go to each
dsl, and one to go to the internal network. you'll need to set up the
WAP on your neighbour's side as a transparent bridge, same with the
bridge on your side. this should give an unadulterated connection to
both DSLs from your linux box. here's where you'd do the bonding
configuration. Since it's impossible, we'll not go over it. :) The
second WAP is necessary to provide internal traffic to your neigbours.
You will need a high-gain antenna. The second bridge is only necessary
if your neighbour needs to access the wired LAN from his house.
let me know if you need any clarification.
-kelsey
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
