Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-25 Thread Colton Conor
Is there anyway to see this type of information through a Windows based
computer. I would like the see the tx and rx bit rate.

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ben West  wrote:

> Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each other, so up to 2
> distinct rates for a single link.  On the open source mac80211
> linux-wireless driver you can see this explicitly.  The rx/tx on one radio
> is the tx/rx on the other.
>
> root@ap1:~# iw wlan0 station dump
> Station 52:e6:fc:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
> inactive time:70 ms
> rx bytes:769202553
> rx packets:4644034
> tx bytes:326581907
> tx packets:465139
> tx retries:76461
> tx failed:4
> signal:  -56 [-57, -62] dBm
> signal avg:-55 [-57, -62] dBm
> tx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
> rx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
> authorized:yes
> authenticated:yes
> preamble:long
> WMM/WME:yes
> MFP:no
> TDLS peer:no
>
> root@ap2:~# iw wlan0 station dump
> Station 62:66:b3:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
> inactive time:10 ms
> rx bytes:569548806
> rx packets:3191667
> tx bytes:412571117
> tx packets:490879
> tx retries:104831
> tx failed:1
> signal:  -57 [-67, -57] dBm
> signal avg:-55 [-62, -56] dBm
> tx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
> rx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
> authorized:yes
> authenticated:yes
> preamble:long
> WMM/WME:yes
> MFP:no
> TDLS peer:no
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Colton Conor 
> wrote:
>
>> In my situation, we are assuming we are dealing with a location with one
>> and only one AP (typical home) and most devices are tablets and smartphones
>> who's antenna's and power output can't be modified. Can be either a 1 or 2
>> story home.
>>
>> So, how much truth is in this article:
>> http://tomatousb.org/tut:increasing-wrt54g-transmit-power
>>
>> The author is claiming that wifi negotiates speed (correct) but in both
>> directions in the uplink and downlink side. He is basically claiming if you
>> increase the power output at the AP, then the downstream (from AP to
>> client) link rate will increase, while the uplink (Client to AP) will stay
>> the same. This make sense, but does wifi really established a different PHY
>> rate for up and down stream. Is this correct?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jack Unger  wrote:
>>
>>>  Going from 20 dB to 26 dB will allow the AP to be heard (with the same
>>> reliability) at double the distance away.
>>>
>>> Yes. If the client power (actually the client EIRP which includes the
>>> antenna gain) stays the same then the "uplink" distance from client to AP
>>> will still be the same.
>>>
>>> Yes, increasing the number of APs is one possible solution. Another is
>>> to use a higher-gain (more directional) antenna on the AP recognizing that
>>> when you increase the AP antenna gain in one direction, you are reducing
>>> the gain (and the coverage) in all other directions.
>>>
>>> jack
>>>
>>>  On 11/13/2014 11:10 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
>>>
>>> So going from a regular powered 100mw (20db) to a high powered 400mw
>>> (26db) is a 6db increase in output power. So you are saying going from
>>> regular to high powered is a double in coverage size?
>>> Doesn't increasing the power output at the AP only increase how loud the
>>> AP can "shout" which in term dictates how far the receiver can hear from?
>>> If the client can't shout back does this do any good?
>>>
>>>  Most client devices today like iPads, Smartphones, and some laptops
>>> can't be modified to increase their antenna gain or power output. So the
>>> only option is to increase the numbers of APs, or the transmit
>>> power/antennas at the AP right?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Jack Unger  wrote:
>>>
  To double the communications distance (everything else holding
 steady) requires an additional 6 dB. Knowing this, you can do the math with
 the various antenna gains and power levels to determine performance.

 Regards,

 Jack Unger
 WISPA FCC Technical Consultant


  On 11/13/2014 10:15 AM, Colton Conor wrote:

 We are comparing multiple SOHO routers and modems that have the same
 Broadcom chipsets. All of them have 802.11N 2x2 configuration. The only
 differences between them are if they have internal or external antennas and
 the gain of the antennas (either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). In addition, some
 sell a high powered wifi radio (400mw) while others have the basic (100mw).

  How much a difference does each of these hardware features make in
 overall wifi performance?


  ___
 Wireless mailing 
 listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


 --
 Support Honest Gil Fu

Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Mike Hammett
Hell, you could use an SXT and go as high as you want. ;-) 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Fred Goldstein"  
To: wireless@wispa.org 
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 1:07:20 PM 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw 


On 11/13/2014 1:26 PM, Jason Bailey wrote: 




Higher gain,lower power works best,in almost any situation. 





But not necessarily in-home. Higher gain only comes from a more directive 
antenna. An "omni" gain antenna has a pancake pattern. If it's a one-story 
building, fine. But I ran into the opposite situation -- at my house, the AP is 
in the basement, and WiFi reception was poor on the second floor. So I ended up 
getting one of MikroTik's 951 high-power routers, and pump out maybe +21 (not 
its maximum -- I sit near it too much), and it reaches the upstairs much better 
than the lower-powered 951 (+17, maybe, with a tailwind) could do. And I've run 
into a lot of other people having trouble with whole-house coverage using 
standard-power WiFi APs. Sure, the laptop or cell phone won't have much power 
in it, but in general the upstream signal gets through okay. 








On Thursday, November 13, 2014 1:15 PM, Colton Conor  
wrote: 





We are comparing multiple SOHO routers and modems that have the same Broadcom 
chipsets. All of them have 802.11N 2x2 configuration. The only differences 
between them are if they have internal or external antennas and the gain of the 
antennas (either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). In addition, some sell a high powered 
wifi radio (400mw) while others have the basic (100mw). 


How much a difference does each of these hardware features make in overall wifi 
performance? 



-- 
 Fred R. Goldstein  k1iofred "at" interisle.net
 Interisle Consulting Group 
 +1 617 795 2701 
___ 
Wireless mailing list 
Wireless@wispa.org 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Colton Conor
Tim,

Yes, I understand that. I understand the factors that have to be enabled
for the PHY rate to be the full 300Mbps that 802.11N 2x2 configuration
allows for. You have to use 40Mhz band, short guards, and both AP and
client have to have 2x2 setup. What I am talking about here is trying to
improve signal strength which increases speed.

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Tim Kerns  wrote:

>   A little caution ... transmit power does not necessarily equate to
> speed.
>
> Speed is a combination of signal strength, signal quality (lack of noise
> or interference) and distance. And doubling the output power will not
> result in double the speed.
>
> Transmit power will give you further distance, but depending on the other
> factors above and the client output power you may not see any gain in
> distance.
>
>
>   *From:* Colton Conor 
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 13, 2014 4:42 PM
> *To:* r...@sbnettech.com ; WISPA General List 
> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw
>
>  We are deploying a DSL network, and Broadcom is the leader in the DSL
> chipset market. So most all these modems we are using have a Broadcom SoC
> design with the VDSL2 modem, 802.11N 2x2 MIMO, Ethernet Switch, and CPU all
> built in. The only thing the modem manufacturers change is the power output
> on the Broadcom wifi (via a amp on the broad) and the selection of internal
> or external omni antennas for the most part. Plus some tweak the wifi
> settings.
>
> We are trying to decide if it is worth the small price premium to pay for
> the modem that has the high powered amp at 400mw vs the regular ones that
> only have 100mw. Sounds like the the high powered ones are worth it
> especially since we have no control of the clients devices (I guess you
> rarely ever do anyways) and we are only supplying one AP/router per home.
>
> I guess this is why AT&T uverse gets such good ratings and reviews from
> their customers on wifi? They are using 2Wire/Pace modems for the most part
> that have all high powered wifi. Thats why in an AT&T area you can see tons
> of them.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Ryan McKenzie  wrote:
>
>>  I second what Josh is saying.  I build out a lot of hotels and large
>> offices, and because of iPhones and iPads, we've started doubling up on the
>> AP's we normally would deploy.  In an indoor environment, it's really tough
>> to do a very directional antenna because you are usually trying to cover a
>> 360 deg area, so high power AP's, low gain antennas, and more AP's is
>> usually the best approach.
>>
>> That being said, I'm curious about your specific choice of Broadcom
>> radios in your first post.  Usually that means you are trying to utilize
>> custom firmware such as DD-WRT or Sputnik, etc.  Is this the case?  If so,
>> it would be interesting to hear what you are trying to accomplish.  I've
>> played with many of those for a long time, until I really saw the
>> capability and power of the Unifi, and stopped messing around with anything
>> else.
>>
>> Just curious as Broadcom is not a radio chipset you hear much about on
>> this list.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> *Ryan McKenzieOffice 385-215-WIFICell 801-309-6161 <801-309-6161>*
>>  On 11/13/14 4:41 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> You are correct.  It never will.  Rx can only be improved by a bigger
>> antenna to listen with.  Antenna gain always has and will be better than
>> raw power.
>>
>> Unless you include the other side's Tx, in which case more power and gain
>> will help.  In the Wifi world you're totally screwed because it's a
>> terrible laptop/phone/game console/tablet/etc in which case you can't do
>> ANYTHING to their devices.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Colton Conor 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Awesome, I am already learning so much from this mailing list. So it
>>> sound like the author was right. So boosting the power output on the AP
>>> will more than likely boost the TX (downlink) speed on the AP side, but do
>>> nothing on the RX speed side of the AP since nothing from the clients
>>> sending perspective has changed right?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ben West  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each other, so up
>>>> to 2 distinct rates for a single link.  On the open source mac80211
&g

Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Tim Kerns
A little caution ... transmit power does not necessarily equate to speed.

Speed is a combination of signal strength, signal quality (lack of noise or 
interference) and distance. And doubling the output power will not result in 
double the speed.

Transmit power will give you further distance, but depending on the other 
factors above and the client output power you may not see any gain in distance.


From: Colton Conor 
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 4:42 PM
To: r...@sbnettech.com ; WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

We are deploying a DSL network, and Broadcom is the leader in the DSL chipset 
market. So most all these modems we are using have a Broadcom SoC design with 
the VDSL2 modem, 802.11N 2x2 MIMO, Ethernet Switch, and CPU all built in. The 
only thing the modem manufacturers change is the power output on the Broadcom 
wifi (via a amp on the broad) and the selection of internal or external omni 
antennas for the most part. Plus some tweak the wifi settings. 

We are trying to decide if it is worth the small price premium to pay for the 
modem that has the high powered amp at 400mw vs the regular ones that only have 
100mw. Sounds like the the high powered ones are worth it especially since we 
have no control of the clients devices (I guess you rarely ever do anyways) and 
we are only supplying one AP/router per home. 

I guess this is why AT&T uverse gets such good ratings and reviews from their 
customers on wifi? They are using 2Wire/Pace modems for the most part that have 
all high powered wifi. Thats why in an AT&T area you can see tons of them.  







On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Ryan McKenzie  wrote:

  I second what Josh is saying.  I build out a lot of hotels and large offices, 
and because of iPhones and iPads, we've started doubling up on the AP's we 
normally would deploy.  In an indoor environment, it's really tough to do a 
very directional antenna because you are usually trying to cover a 360 deg 
area, so high power AP's, low gain antennas, and more AP's is usually the best 
approach. 

  That being said, I'm curious about your specific choice of Broadcom radios in 
your first post.  Usually that means you are trying to utilize custom firmware 
such as DD-WRT or Sputnik, etc.  Is this the case?  If so, it would be 
interesting to hear what you are trying to accomplish.  I've played with many 
of those for a long time, until I really saw the capability and power of the 
Unifi, and stopped messing around with anything else.  

  Just curious as Broadcom is not a radio chipset you hear much about on this 
list. 


  Thanks,
  Ryan McKenzie
  Office 385-215-WIFI
  Cell 801-309-6161


  On 11/13/14 4:41 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

You are correct.  It never will.  Rx can only be improved by a bigger 
antenna to listen with.  Antenna gain always has and will be better than raw 
power. 

Unless you include the other side's Tx, in which case more power and gain 
will help.  In the Wifi world you're totally screwed because it's a terrible 
laptop/phone/game console/tablet/etc in which case you can't do ANYTHING to 
their devices.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Colton Conor  
wrote:

  Awesome, I am already learning so much from this mailing list. So it 
sound like the author was right. So boosting the power output on the AP will 
more than likely boost the TX (downlink) speed on the AP side, but do nothing 
on the RX speed side of the AP since nothing from the clients sending 
perspective has changed right?  

  On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ben West  wrote:

Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each other, so up 
to 2 distinct rates for a single link.  On the open source mac80211 
linux-wireless driver you can see this explicitly.  The rx/tx on one radio is 
the tx/rx on the other.

root@ap1:~# iw wlan0 station dump
Station 52:e6:fc:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
inactive time:70 ms
rx bytes:769202553
rx packets:4644034
tx bytes:326581907
tx packets:465139
tx retries:76461
tx failed:4
signal:  -56 [-57, -62] dBm
signal avg:-55 [-57, -62] dBm
tx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
rx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
authorized:yes
authenticated:yes
preamble:long
WMM/WME:yes
MFP:no
TDLS peer:no

root@ap2:~# iw wlan0 station dump
Station 62:66:b3:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
inactive time:10 ms
rx bytes:569548806
rx packets:3191667
tx bytes:412571117
tx pack

Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Colton Conor
We are deploying a DSL network, and Broadcom is the leader in the DSL
chipset market. So most all these modems we are using have a Broadcom SoC
design with the VDSL2 modem, 802.11N 2x2 MIMO, Ethernet Switch, and CPU all
built in. The only thing the modem manufacturers change is the power output
on the Broadcom wifi (via a amp on the broad) and the selection of internal
or external omni antennas for the most part. Plus some tweak the wifi
settings.

We are trying to decide if it is worth the small price premium to pay for
the modem that has the high powered amp at 400mw vs the regular ones that
only have 100mw. Sounds like the the high powered ones are worth it
especially since we have no control of the clients devices (I guess you
rarely ever do anyways) and we are only supplying one AP/router per home.

I guess this is why AT&T uverse gets such good ratings and reviews from
their customers on wifi? They are using 2Wire/Pace modems for the most part
that have all high powered wifi. Thats why in an AT&T area you can see tons
of them.







On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Ryan McKenzie  wrote:

>  I second what Josh is saying.  I build out a lot of hotels and large
> offices, and because of iPhones and iPads, we've started doubling up on the
> AP's we normally would deploy.  In an indoor environment, it's really tough
> to do a very directional antenna because you are usually trying to cover a
> 360 deg area, so high power AP's, low gain antennas, and more AP's is
> usually the best approach.
>
> That being said, I'm curious about your specific choice of Broadcom radios
> in your first post.  Usually that means you are trying to utilize custom
> firmware such as DD-WRT or Sputnik, etc.  Is this the case?  If so, it
> would be interesting to hear what you are trying to accomplish.  I've
> played with many of those for a long time, until I really saw the
> capability and power of the Unifi, and stopped messing around with anything
> else.
>
> Just curious as Broadcom is not a radio chipset you hear much about on
> this list.
>
>  Thanks,
>
>
>
> *Ryan McKenzie Office 385-215-WIFI Cell 801-309-6161 <801-309-6161> *
>  On 11/13/14 4:41 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> You are correct.  It never will.  Rx can only be improved by a bigger
> antenna to listen with.  Antenna gain always has and will be better than
> raw power.
>
>  Unless you include the other side's Tx, in which case more power and
> gain will help.  In the Wifi world you're totally screwed because it's a
> terrible laptop/phone/game console/tablet/etc in which case you can't do
> ANYTHING to their devices.
>
>
>  Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Colton Conor 
> wrote:
>
>> Awesome, I am already learning so much from this mailing list. So it
>> sound like the author was right. So boosting the power output on the AP
>> will more than likely boost the TX (downlink) speed on the AP side, but do
>> nothing on the RX speed side of the AP since nothing from the clients
>> sending perspective has changed right?
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ben West  wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each other, so up to
>>> 2 distinct rates for a single link.  On the open source mac80211
>>> linux-wireless driver you can see this explicitly.  The rx/tx on one radio
>>> is the tx/rx on the other.
>>>
>>> root@ap1:~# iw wlan0 station dump
>>> Station 52:e6:fc:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
>>> inactive time:70 ms
>>> rx bytes:769202553
>>> rx packets:4644034
>>> tx bytes:326581907
>>> tx packets:465139
>>> tx retries:76461
>>> tx failed:4
>>> signal:  -56 [-57, -62] dBm
>>> signal avg:-55 [-57, -62] dBm
>>> tx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
>>> rx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
>>> authorized:yes
>>> authenticated:yes
>>> preamble:long
>>> WMM/WME:yes
>>> MFP:no
>>> TDLS peer:no
>>>
>>> root@ap2:~# iw wlan0 station dump
>>> Station 62:66:b3:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
>>> inactive time:10 ms
>>> rx bytes:569548806
>>> rx packets:3191667
>>> tx bytes:412571117
>>> tx packets:490879
>>> tx retries:104831
>>> tx failed:1
>>> signal:  -57 [-67, -57] dBm
>>> signal avg:-55 [-62, -56] dBm
>>> tx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
>>> rx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
>>> authorized:yes
>>> authenticated:yes
>>> preamble:long
>>> WMM/WME:yes
>>> MFP:no
>>> TDLS peer:no
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Colton Conor 
>>> wrote:
>>>
  In my situation, we are assuming we are dealing with a location with
 one and only one AP (typical home) and most devices are tablets and
 smartphones who's antenna's and power output can't be modified. Can be
 eithe

Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Josh Reynolds

All of the UBNT AC products use broadcom.

On 11/13/2014 02:59 PM, Ryan McKenzie wrote:
I second what Josh is saying.  I build out a lot of hotels and large 
offices, and because of iPhones and iPads, we've started doubling up 
on the AP's we normally would deploy.  In an indoor environment, it's 
really tough to do a very directional antenna because you are usually 
trying to cover a 360 deg area, so high power AP's, low gain antennas, 
and more AP's is usually the best approach.


That being said, I'm curious about your specific choice of Broadcom 
radios in your first post.  Usually that means you are trying to 
utilize custom firmware such as DD-WRT or Sputnik, etc.  Is this the 
case?  If so, it would be interesting to hear what you are trying to 
accomplish.  I've played with many of those for a long time, until I 
really saw the capability and power of the Unifi, and stopped messing 
around with anything else.


Just curious as Broadcom is not a radio chipset you hear much about on 
this list.


Thanks,
*Ryan McKenzie
Office 385-215-WIFI
Cell 801-309-6161
*
On 11/13/14 4:41 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
You are correct.  It never will.  Rx can only be improved by a bigger 
antenna to listen with.  Antenna gain always has and will be better 
than raw power.


Unless you include the other side's Tx, in which case more power and 
gain will help.  In the Wifi world you're totally screwed because 
it's a terrible laptop/phone/game console/tablet/etc in which case 
you can't do ANYTHING to their devices.



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Colton Conor > wrote:


Awesome, I am already learning so much from this mailing list. So
it sound like the author was right. So boosting the power output
on the AP will more than likely boost the TX (downlink) speed on
the AP side, but do nothing on the RX speed side of the AP since
nothing from the clients sending perspective has changed right?

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ben West mailto:b...@gowasabi.net>> wrote:

Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each
other, so up to 2 distinct rates for a single link.  On the
open source mac80211 linux-wireless driver you can see this
explicitly.  The rx/tx on one radio is the tx/rx on the other.

root@ap1:~# iw wlan0 station dump
Station 52:e6:fc:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
inactive time:70 ms
rx bytes:769202553
rx packets:4644034
tx bytes:326581907
tx packets:465139
tx retries:76461
tx failed:4
signal:  -56 [-57, -62] dBm
signal avg:-55 [-57, -62] dBm
tx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
rx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
authorized:yes
authenticated:yes
preamble:long
WMM/WME:yes
MFP:no
TDLS peer:no

root@ap2:~# iw wlan0 station dump
Station 62:66:b3:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
inactive time:10 ms
rx bytes:569548806
rx packets:3191667
tx bytes:412571117
tx packets:490879
tx retries:104831
tx failed:1
signal:  -57 [-67, -57] dBm
signal avg:-55 [-62, -56] dBm
tx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
rx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
authorized:yes
authenticated:yes
preamble:long
WMM/WME:yes
MFP:no
TDLS peer:no




On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Colton Conor
mailto:colton.co...@gmail.com>> wrote:

In my situation, we are assuming we are dealing with a
location with one and only one AP (typical home) and most
devices are tablets and smartphones who's antenna's and
power output can't be modified. Can be either a 1 or 2
story home.

So, how much truth is in this article:
http://tomatousb.org/tut:increasing-wrt54g-transmit-power

The author is claiming that wifi negotiates speed
(correct) but in both directions in the uplink and
downlink side. He is basically claiming if you increase
the power output at the AP, then the downstream (from AP
to client) link rate will increase, while the uplink
(Client to AP) will stay the same. This make sense, but
does wifi really established a different PHY rate for up
and down stream. Is this correct?



On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jack Unger
mailto:jun...@ask-wi.com>> wrote:

Going from 20 dB to 26 dB will allow 

Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Ryan McKenzie
I second what Josh is saying.  I build out a lot of hotels and large 
offices, and because of iPhones and iPads, we've started doubling up on 
the AP's we normally would deploy.  In an indoor environment, it's 
really tough to do a very directional antenna because you are usually 
trying to cover a 360 deg area, so high power AP's, low gain antennas, 
and more AP's is usually the best approach.


That being said, I'm curious about your specific choice of Broadcom 
radios in your first post.  Usually that means you are trying to utilize 
custom firmware such as DD-WRT or Sputnik, etc. Is this the case?  If 
so, it would be interesting to hear what you are trying to accomplish.  
I've played with many of those for a long time, until I really saw the 
capability and power of the Unifi, and stopped messing around with 
anything else.


Just curious as Broadcom is not a radio chipset you hear much about on 
this list.


Thanks,
*Ryan McKenzie
Office 385-215-WIFI
Cell 801-309-6161
*
On 11/13/14 4:41 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
You are correct.  It never will.  Rx can only be improved by a bigger 
antenna to listen with.  Antenna gain always has and will be better 
than raw power.


Unless you include the other side's Tx, in which case more power and 
gain will help.  In the Wifi world you're totally screwed because it's 
a terrible laptop/phone/game console/tablet/etc in which case you 
can't do ANYTHING to their devices.



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Colton Conor > wrote:


Awesome, I am already learning so much from this mailing list. So
it sound like the author was right. So boosting the power output
on the AP will more than likely boost the TX (downlink) speed on
the AP side, but do nothing on the RX speed side of the AP since
nothing from the clients sending perspective has changed right?

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ben West mailto:b...@gowasabi.net>> wrote:

Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each
other, so up to 2 distinct rates for a single link.  On the
open source mac80211 linux-wireless driver you can see this
explicitly.  The rx/tx on one radio is the tx/rx on the other.

root@ap1:~# iw wlan0 station dump
Station 52:e6:fc:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
inactive time:70 ms
rx bytes:769202553
rx packets:4644034
tx bytes:326581907
tx packets:465139
tx retries:76461
tx failed:4
signal:  -56 [-57, -62] dBm
signal avg:-55 [-57, -62] dBm
tx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
rx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
authorized:yes
authenticated:yes
preamble:long
WMM/WME:yes
MFP:no
TDLS peer:no

root@ap2:~# iw wlan0 station dump
Station 62:66:b3:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
inactive time:10 ms
rx bytes:569548806
rx packets:3191667
tx bytes:412571117
tx packets:490879
tx retries:104831
tx failed:1
signal:  -57 [-67, -57] dBm
signal avg:-55 [-62, -56] dBm
tx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
rx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
authorized:yes
authenticated:yes
preamble:long
WMM/WME:yes
MFP:no
TDLS peer:no




On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Colton Conor
mailto:colton.co...@gmail.com>> wrote:

In my situation, we are assuming we are dealing with a
location with one and only one AP (typical home) and most
devices are tablets and smartphones who's antenna's and
power output can't be modified. Can be either a 1 or 2
story home.

So, how much truth is in this article:
http://tomatousb.org/tut:increasing-wrt54g-transmit-power

The author is claiming that wifi negotiates speed
(correct) but in both directions in the uplink and
downlink side. He is basically claiming if you increase
the power output at the AP, then the downstream (from AP
to client) link rate will increase, while the uplink
(Client to AP) will stay the same. This make sense, but
does wifi really established a different PHY rate for up
and down stream. Is this correct?



On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jack Unger
mailto:jun...@ask-wi.com>> wrote:

Going from 20 dB to 26 dB will allow the AP to be
heard (with the same reliability) at double the
 

Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Ben West
Depending on how fancy Broadcom's 802.11 implementation is in devices being
tested, there is also the Transmit Power Control (TPC) feature of 802.11h,
although that is normally (exclusively?) intended for 5.8GHz band, i.e. as
part of DFS.

More: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11h-2003

If the AP and client both support it, you may see the radio driver (on
Linux clients) emit status messages like this, which was observed in the
wild on a university's WLAN:

 wlan0: Limiting TX power to 14 dBm as advertised by a0:cf:5b:3f:xx:xx
 wlan0: Limiting TX power to 5 dBm as advertised by 64:ae:0c:c5:xx:xx

In theory, such a feature would let the AP tell especially "loud" clients
to quiet down, so as not to drown out the weaker ones.  But, it would
only work for APs and clients which support this feature, and have it
enabled.

My guess is this feature is only available in the pricier enterprise-class
APs (e.g. Cisco).

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> You are correct.  It never will.  Rx can only be improved by a bigger
> antenna to listen with.  Antenna gain always has and will be better than
> raw power.
>
> Unless you include the other side's Tx, in which case more power and gain
> will help.  In the Wifi world you're totally screwed because it's a
> terrible laptop/phone/game console/tablet/etc in which case you can't do
> ANYTHING to their devices.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Colton Conor 
> wrote:
>
>> Awesome, I am already learning so much from this mailing list. So it
>> sound like the author was right. So boosting the power output on the AP
>> will more than likely boost the TX (downlink) speed on the AP side, but do
>> nothing on the RX speed side of the AP since nothing from the clients
>> sending perspective has changed right?
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ben West  wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each other, so up to
>>> 2 distinct rates for a single link.  On the open source mac80211
>>> linux-wireless driver you can see this explicitly.  The rx/tx on one radio
>>> is the tx/rx on the other.
>>>
>>> root@ap1:~# iw wlan0 station dump
>>> Station 52:e6:fc:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
>>> inactive time:70 ms
>>> rx bytes:769202553
>>> rx packets:4644034
>>> tx bytes:326581907
>>> tx packets:465139
>>> tx retries:76461
>>> tx failed:4
>>> signal:  -56 [-57, -62] dBm
>>> signal avg:-55 [-57, -62] dBm
>>> tx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
>>> rx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
>>> authorized:yes
>>> authenticated:yes
>>> preamble:long
>>> WMM/WME:yes
>>> MFP:no
>>> TDLS peer:no
>>>
>>> root@ap2:~# iw wlan0 station dump
>>> Station 62:66:b3:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
>>> inactive time:10 ms
>>> rx bytes:569548806
>>> rx packets:3191667
>>> tx bytes:412571117
>>> tx packets:490879
>>> tx retries:104831
>>> tx failed:1
>>> signal:  -57 [-67, -57] dBm
>>> signal avg:-55 [-62, -56] dBm
>>> tx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
>>> rx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
>>> authorized:yes
>>> authenticated:yes
>>> preamble:long
>>> WMM/WME:yes
>>> MFP:no
>>> TDLS peer:no
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Colton Conor 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 In my situation, we are assuming we are dealing with a location with
 one and only one AP (typical home) and most devices are tablets and
 smartphones who's antenna's and power output can't be modified. Can be
 either a 1 or 2 story home.

 So, how much truth is in this article:
 http://tomatousb.org/tut:increasing-wrt54g-transmit-power

 The author is claiming that wifi negotiates speed (correct) but in both
 directions in the uplink and downlink side. He is basically claiming if you
 increase the power output at the AP, then the downstream (from AP to
 client) link rate will increase, while the uplink (Client to AP) will stay
 the same. This make sense, but does wifi really established a different PHY
 rate for up and down stream. Is this correct?



 On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jack Unger  wrote:

>  Going from 20 dB to 26 dB will allow the AP to be heard (with the
> same reliability) at double the distance away.
>
> Yes. If the client power (actually the client EIRP which includes the
> antenna gain) stays the same then the "uplink" distance from client to AP
> will still be the same.
>
> Yes, increasing the number of APs is one possible solution. Another is
> to use a higher-gain (more directional) antenna on the AP recognizing that
> when you increase the AP antenna gain in one direction, you are re

Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Josh Luthman
You are correct.  It never will.  Rx can only be improved by a bigger
antenna to listen with.  Antenna gain always has and will be better than
raw power.

Unless you include the other side's Tx, in which case more power and gain
will help.  In the Wifi world you're totally screwed because it's a
terrible laptop/phone/game console/tablet/etc in which case you can't do
ANYTHING to their devices.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Colton Conor 
wrote:

> Awesome, I am already learning so much from this mailing list. So it sound
> like the author was right. So boosting the power output on the AP will more
> than likely boost the TX (downlink) speed on the AP side, but do nothing on
> the RX speed side of the AP since nothing from the clients sending
> perspective has changed right?
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ben West  wrote:
>
>> Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each other, so up to
>> 2 distinct rates for a single link.  On the open source mac80211
>> linux-wireless driver you can see this explicitly.  The rx/tx on one radio
>> is the tx/rx on the other.
>>
>> root@ap1:~# iw wlan0 station dump
>> Station 52:e6:fc:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
>> inactive time:70 ms
>> rx bytes:769202553
>> rx packets:4644034
>> tx bytes:326581907
>> tx packets:465139
>> tx retries:76461
>> tx failed:4
>> signal:  -56 [-57, -62] dBm
>> signal avg:-55 [-57, -62] dBm
>> tx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
>> rx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
>> authorized:yes
>> authenticated:yes
>> preamble:long
>> WMM/WME:yes
>> MFP:no
>> TDLS peer:no
>>
>> root@ap2:~# iw wlan0 station dump
>> Station 62:66:b3:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
>> inactive time:10 ms
>> rx bytes:569548806
>> rx packets:3191667
>> tx bytes:412571117
>> tx packets:490879
>> tx retries:104831
>> tx failed:1
>> signal:  -57 [-67, -57] dBm
>> signal avg:-55 [-62, -56] dBm
>> tx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
>> rx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
>> authorized:yes
>> authenticated:yes
>> preamble:long
>> WMM/WME:yes
>> MFP:no
>> TDLS peer:no
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Colton Conor 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In my situation, we are assuming we are dealing with a location with one
>>> and only one AP (typical home) and most devices are tablets and smartphones
>>> who's antenna's and power output can't be modified. Can be either a 1 or 2
>>> story home.
>>>
>>> So, how much truth is in this article:
>>> http://tomatousb.org/tut:increasing-wrt54g-transmit-power
>>>
>>> The author is claiming that wifi negotiates speed (correct) but in both
>>> directions in the uplink and downlink side. He is basically claiming if you
>>> increase the power output at the AP, then the downstream (from AP to
>>> client) link rate will increase, while the uplink (Client to AP) will stay
>>> the same. This make sense, but does wifi really established a different PHY
>>> rate for up and down stream. Is this correct?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jack Unger  wrote:
>>>
  Going from 20 dB to 26 dB will allow the AP to be heard (with the
 same reliability) at double the distance away.

 Yes. If the client power (actually the client EIRP which includes the
 antenna gain) stays the same then the "uplink" distance from client to AP
 will still be the same.

 Yes, increasing the number of APs is one possible solution. Another is
 to use a higher-gain (more directional) antenna on the AP recognizing that
 when you increase the AP antenna gain in one direction, you are reducing
 the gain (and the coverage) in all other directions.

 jack

  On 11/13/2014 11:10 AM, Colton Conor wrote:

 So going from a regular powered 100mw (20db) to a high powered 400mw
 (26db) is a 6db increase in output power. So you are saying going from
 regular to high powered is a double in coverage size?
 Doesn't increasing the power output at the AP only increase how loud
 the AP can "shout" which in term dictates how far the receiver can hear
 from? If the client can't shout back does this do any good?

  Most client devices today like iPads, Smartphones, and some laptops
 can't be modified to increase their antenna gain or power output. So the
 only option is to increase the numbers of APs, or the transmit
 power/antennas at the AP right?

 On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Jack Unger  wrote:

>  To double the communications distance (everything else holding
> steady) requires an additional 6 dB. Knowing this, you can do the math 
> with
> the various antenna gains and power levels to d

Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Colton Conor
Awesome, I am already learning so much from this mailing list. So it sound
like the author was right. So boosting the power output on the AP will more
than likely boost the TX (downlink) speed on the AP side, but do nothing on
the RX speed side of the AP since nothing from the clients sending
perspective has changed right?

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ben West  wrote:

> Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each other, so up to 2
> distinct rates for a single link.  On the open source mac80211
> linux-wireless driver you can see this explicitly.  The rx/tx on one radio
> is the tx/rx on the other.
>
> root@ap1:~# iw wlan0 station dump
> Station 52:e6:fc:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
> inactive time:70 ms
> rx bytes:769202553
> rx packets:4644034
> tx bytes:326581907
> tx packets:465139
> tx retries:76461
> tx failed:4
> signal:  -56 [-57, -62] dBm
> signal avg:-55 [-57, -62] dBm
> tx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
> rx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
> authorized:yes
> authenticated:yes
> preamble:long
> WMM/WME:yes
> MFP:no
> TDLS peer:no
>
> root@ap2:~# iw wlan0 station dump
> Station 62:66:b3:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
> inactive time:10 ms
> rx bytes:569548806
> rx packets:3191667
> tx bytes:412571117
> tx packets:490879
> tx retries:104831
> tx failed:1
> signal:  -57 [-67, -57] dBm
> signal avg:-55 [-62, -56] dBm
> tx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
> rx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
> authorized:yes
> authenticated:yes
> preamble:long
> WMM/WME:yes
> MFP:no
> TDLS peer:no
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Colton Conor 
> wrote:
>
>> In my situation, we are assuming we are dealing with a location with one
>> and only one AP (typical home) and most devices are tablets and smartphones
>> who's antenna's and power output can't be modified. Can be either a 1 or 2
>> story home.
>>
>> So, how much truth is in this article:
>> http://tomatousb.org/tut:increasing-wrt54g-transmit-power
>>
>> The author is claiming that wifi negotiates speed (correct) but in both
>> directions in the uplink and downlink side. He is basically claiming if you
>> increase the power output at the AP, then the downstream (from AP to
>> client) link rate will increase, while the uplink (Client to AP) will stay
>> the same. This make sense, but does wifi really established a different PHY
>> rate for up and down stream. Is this correct?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jack Unger  wrote:
>>
>>>  Going from 20 dB to 26 dB will allow the AP to be heard (with the same
>>> reliability) at double the distance away.
>>>
>>> Yes. If the client power (actually the client EIRP which includes the
>>> antenna gain) stays the same then the "uplink" distance from client to AP
>>> will still be the same.
>>>
>>> Yes, increasing the number of APs is one possible solution. Another is
>>> to use a higher-gain (more directional) antenna on the AP recognizing that
>>> when you increase the AP antenna gain in one direction, you are reducing
>>> the gain (and the coverage) in all other directions.
>>>
>>> jack
>>>
>>>  On 11/13/2014 11:10 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
>>>
>>> So going from a regular powered 100mw (20db) to a high powered 400mw
>>> (26db) is a 6db increase in output power. So you are saying going from
>>> regular to high powered is a double in coverage size?
>>> Doesn't increasing the power output at the AP only increase how loud the
>>> AP can "shout" which in term dictates how far the receiver can hear from?
>>> If the client can't shout back does this do any good?
>>>
>>>  Most client devices today like iPads, Smartphones, and some laptops
>>> can't be modified to increase their antenna gain or power output. So the
>>> only option is to increase the numbers of APs, or the transmit
>>> power/antennas at the AP right?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Jack Unger  wrote:
>>>
  To double the communications distance (everything else holding
 steady) requires an additional 6 dB. Knowing this, you can do the math with
 the various antenna gains and power levels to determine performance.

 Regards,

 Jack Unger
 WISPA FCC Technical Consultant


  On 11/13/2014 10:15 AM, Colton Conor wrote:

 We are comparing multiple SOHO routers and modems that have the same
 Broadcom chipsets. All of them have 802.11N 2x2 configuration. The only
 differences between them are if they have internal or external antennas and
 the gain of the antennas (either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). In addition, some
 sell a high powered wifi radio (400mw) while others have the basic (100mw).

  How much a difference does each of these hardware features make in
 overall wifi performance?


Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Ben West
Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each other, so up to 2
distinct rates for a single link.  On the open source mac80211
linux-wireless driver you can see this explicitly.  The rx/tx on one radio
is the tx/rx on the other.

root@ap1:~# iw wlan0 station dump
Station 52:e6:fc:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
inactive time:70 ms
rx bytes:769202553
rx packets:4644034
tx bytes:326581907
tx packets:465139
tx retries:76461
tx failed:4
signal:  -56 [-57, -62] dBm
signal avg:-55 [-57, -62] dBm
tx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
rx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
authorized:yes
authenticated:yes
preamble:long
WMM/WME:yes
MFP:no
TDLS peer:no

root@ap2:~# iw wlan0 station dump
Station 62:66:b3:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0)
inactive time:10 ms
rx bytes:569548806
rx packets:3191667
tx bytes:412571117
tx packets:490879
tx retries:104831
tx failed:1
signal:  -57 [-67, -57] dBm
signal avg:-55 [-62, -56] dBm
tx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI
rx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14
authorized:yes
authenticated:yes
preamble:long
WMM/WME:yes
MFP:no
TDLS peer:no




On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Colton Conor 
wrote:

> In my situation, we are assuming we are dealing with a location with one
> and only one AP (typical home) and most devices are tablets and smartphones
> who's antenna's and power output can't be modified. Can be either a 1 or 2
> story home.
>
> So, how much truth is in this article:
> http://tomatousb.org/tut:increasing-wrt54g-transmit-power
>
> The author is claiming that wifi negotiates speed (correct) but in both
> directions in the uplink and downlink side. He is basically claiming if you
> increase the power output at the AP, then the downstream (from AP to
> client) link rate will increase, while the uplink (Client to AP) will stay
> the same. This make sense, but does wifi really established a different PHY
> rate for up and down stream. Is this correct?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jack Unger  wrote:
>
>>  Going from 20 dB to 26 dB will allow the AP to be heard (with the same
>> reliability) at double the distance away.
>>
>> Yes. If the client power (actually the client EIRP which includes the
>> antenna gain) stays the same then the "uplink" distance from client to AP
>> will still be the same.
>>
>> Yes, increasing the number of APs is one possible solution. Another is to
>> use a higher-gain (more directional) antenna on the AP recognizing that
>> when you increase the AP antenna gain in one direction, you are reducing
>> the gain (and the coverage) in all other directions.
>>
>> jack
>>
>>  On 11/13/2014 11:10 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
>>
>> So going from a regular powered 100mw (20db) to a high powered 400mw
>> (26db) is a 6db increase in output power. So you are saying going from
>> regular to high powered is a double in coverage size?
>> Doesn't increasing the power output at the AP only increase how loud the
>> AP can "shout" which in term dictates how far the receiver can hear from?
>> If the client can't shout back does this do any good?
>>
>>  Most client devices today like iPads, Smartphones, and some laptops
>> can't be modified to increase their antenna gain or power output. So the
>> only option is to increase the numbers of APs, or the transmit
>> power/antennas at the AP right?
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Jack Unger  wrote:
>>
>>>  To double the communications distance (everything else holding steady)
>>> requires an additional 6 dB. Knowing this, you can do the math with the
>>> various antenna gains and power levels to determine performance.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Jack Unger
>>> WISPA FCC Technical Consultant
>>>
>>>
>>>  On 11/13/2014 10:15 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
>>>
>>> We are comparing multiple SOHO routers and modems that have the same
>>> Broadcom chipsets. All of them have 802.11N 2x2 configuration. The only
>>> differences between them are if they have internal or external antennas and
>>> the gain of the antennas (either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). In addition, some
>>> sell a high powered wifi radio (400mw) while others have the basic (100mw).
>>>
>>>  How much a difference does each of these hardware features make in
>>> overall wifi performance?
>>>
>>>
>>>  ___
>>> Wireless mailing 
>>> listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Support Honest Gil Fulbright for Senate 
>>> 
>>>
>>> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
>>> Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks"
>>> Serving the WISP Community since 1993760-678-5033  jun...@ask-wi.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wireless mai

Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Colton Conor
In my situation, we are assuming we are dealing with a location with one
and only one AP (typical home) and most devices are tablets and smartphones
who's antenna's and power output can't be modified. Can be either a 1 or 2
story home.

So, how much truth is in this article:
http://tomatousb.org/tut:increasing-wrt54g-transmit-power

The author is claiming that wifi negotiates speed (correct) but in both
directions in the uplink and downlink side. He is basically claiming if you
increase the power output at the AP, then the downstream (from AP to
client) link rate will increase, while the uplink (Client to AP) will stay
the same. This make sense, but does wifi really established a different PHY
rate for up and down stream. Is this correct?



On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jack Unger  wrote:

>  Going from 20 dB to 26 dB will allow the AP to be heard (with the same
> reliability) at double the distance away.
>
> Yes. If the client power (actually the client EIRP which includes the
> antenna gain) stays the same then the "uplink" distance from client to AP
> will still be the same.
>
> Yes, increasing the number of APs is one possible solution. Another is to
> use a higher-gain (more directional) antenna on the AP recognizing that
> when you increase the AP antenna gain in one direction, you are reducing
> the gain (and the coverage) in all other directions.
>
> jack
>
>  On 11/13/2014 11:10 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
>
> So going from a regular powered 100mw (20db) to a high powered 400mw
> (26db) is a 6db increase in output power. So you are saying going from
> regular to high powered is a double in coverage size?
> Doesn't increasing the power output at the AP only increase how loud the
> AP can "shout" which in term dictates how far the receiver can hear from?
> If the client can't shout back does this do any good?
>
>  Most client devices today like iPads, Smartphones, and some laptops
> can't be modified to increase their antenna gain or power output. So the
> only option is to increase the numbers of APs, or the transmit
> power/antennas at the AP right?
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Jack Unger  wrote:
>
>>  To double the communications distance (everything else holding steady)
>> requires an additional 6 dB. Knowing this, you can do the math with the
>> various antenna gains and power levels to determine performance.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Jack Unger
>> WISPA FCC Technical Consultant
>>
>>
>>  On 11/13/2014 10:15 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
>>
>> We are comparing multiple SOHO routers and modems that have the same
>> Broadcom chipsets. All of them have 802.11N 2x2 configuration. The only
>> differences between them are if they have internal or external antennas and
>> the gain of the antennas (either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). In addition, some
>> sell a high powered wifi radio (400mw) while others have the basic (100mw).
>>
>>  How much a difference does each of these hardware features make in
>> overall wifi performance?
>>
>>
>>  ___
>> Wireless mailing 
>> listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>>
>> --
>> Support Honest Gil Fulbright for Senate 
>> 
>>
>> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
>> Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks"
>> Serving the WISP Community since 1993760-678-5033  jun...@ask-wi.com
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wireless mailing list
>> Wireless@wispa.org
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>>
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing 
> listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>
> --
> Support Honest Gil Fulbright for Senate 
> 
>
> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks"
> Serving the WISP Community since 1993760-678-5033  jun...@ask-wi.com
>
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Jack Unger

  
  
Going from 20 dB to 26 dB will allow the AP to
  be heard (with the same reliability) at double the distance away.
  
  
  Yes. If the client power (actually the client EIRP which includes
  the antenna gain) stays the same then the "uplink" distance from
  client to AP will still be the same. 
  
  Yes, increasing the number of APs is one possible solution.
  Another is to use a higher-gain (more directional) antenna on the
  AP recognizing that when you increase the AP antenna gain in one
  direction, you are reducing the gain (and the coverage) in all
  other directions. 
  
  jack
  

On 11/13/2014 11:10 AM, Colton Conor
  wrote:


  So going from a regular powered 100mw (20db) to a
high powered 400mw (26db) is a 6db increase in output power. So
you are saying going from regular to high powered is a double in
coverage size?
Doesn't increasing the power output at the AP only increase
  how loud the AP can "shout" which in term dictates how far the
  receiver can hear from? If the client can't shout back does
  this do any good? 


Most client devices today like iPads, Smartphones, and some
  laptops can't be modified to increase their antenna gain or
  power output. So the only option is to increase the numbers of
  APs, or the transmit power/antennas at the AP right? 
  
  
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Jack
  Unger 
  wrote:
  
 To
double the communications distance (everything else
holding steady) requires an additional 6 dB. Knowing
this, you can do the math with the various antenna gains
and power levels to determine performance. 

Regards, 

Jack Unger
WISPA FCC Technical Consultant


  
On 11/13/2014 10:15 AM, Colton Conor wrote:

  
  
  We are comparing multiple SOHO routers
and modems that have the same Broadcom chipsets. All
of them have 802.11N 2x2 configuration. The only
differences between them are if they have internal
or external antennas and the gain of the antennas
(either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). In addition, some
sell a high powered wifi radio (400mw) while others
have the basic (100mw).


How much a difference does each of these
  hardware features make in overall wifi
  performance?
  
  
  
  

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 
   
  -- 
Support Honest Gil Fulbright for Senate


Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks"
Serving the WISP Community since 1993
760-678-5033  jun...@ask-wi.com






___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

  


  
  
  
  
  ___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless



-- 
Support Honest Gil Fulbright for Senate


Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks"
Serving the WISP Community since 1993
760-678-5033  jun...@ask-wi.com




  

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread John Thomas
You have the right idea. It is only when you increase power on both ends that 
the distance increases.

Tablets in particular only have about 10 - 15 mW radios so that is the lowest 
common denominator. If you have radios with removable antennas, you can 
sometimes use different antennas to improve your coverage.

I found some dual band omnis for like $8 each that were rated 7 dB. I'm seeing 
a 9 dB improvement on 2.4 GHz, but only about 3 dB on 5 GHz.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

Colton Conor  wrote:

>___
>Wireless mailing list
>Wireless@wispa.org
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Colton Conor
So going from a regular powered 100mw (20db) to a high powered 400mw (26db)
is a 6db increase in output power. So you are saying going from regular to
high powered is a double in coverage size?
Doesn't increasing the power output at the AP only increase how loud the AP
can "shout" which in term dictates how far the receiver can hear from? If
the client can't shout back does this do any good?

Most client devices today like iPads, Smartphones, and some laptops can't
be modified to increase their antenna gain or power output. So the only
option is to increase the numbers of APs, or the transmit power/antennas at
the AP right?

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Jack Unger  wrote:

>  To double the communications distance (everything else holding steady)
> requires an additional 6 dB. Knowing this, you can do the math with the
> various antenna gains and power levels to determine performance.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jack Unger
> WISPA FCC Technical Consultant
>
>
>  On 11/13/2014 10:15 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
>
> We are comparing multiple SOHO routers and modems that have the same
> Broadcom chipsets. All of them have 802.11N 2x2 configuration. The only
> differences between them are if they have internal or external antennas and
> the gain of the antennas (either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). In addition, some
> sell a high powered wifi radio (400mw) while others have the basic (100mw).
>
>  How much a difference does each of these hardware features make in
> overall wifi performance?
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing 
> listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>
> --
> Support Honest Gil Fulbright for Senate 
> 
>
> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks"
> Serving the WISP Community since 1993760-678-5033  jun...@ask-wi.com
>
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Fred Goldstein

On 11/13/2014 1:26 PM, Jason Bailey wrote:

Higher gain,lower power works best,in almost any situation.




But not necessarily in-home.  Higher gain only comes from a more 
directive antenna.  An "omni" gain antenna has a pancake pattern. If 
it's a one-story building, fine.  But I ran into the opposite situation 
-- at my house, the AP is in the basement, and WiFi reception was poor 
on the second floor.  So I ended up getting one of MikroTik's 951 
high-power routers, and pump out maybe +21 (not its maximum -- I sit 
near it too much), and it reaches the upstairs much better than the 
lower-powered 951 (+17, maybe, with a tailwind) could do.  And I've run 
into a lot of other people having trouble with whole-house coverage 
using standard-power WiFi APs.  Sure, the laptop or cell phone won't 
have much power in it, but in general the upstream signal gets through okay.


On Thursday, November 13, 2014 1:15 PM, Colton Conor 
 wrote:



We are comparing multiple SOHO routers and modems that have the same 
Broadcom chipsets. All of them have 802.11N 2x2 configuration. The 
only differences between them are if they have internal or external 
antennas and the gain of the antennas (either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). 
In addition, some sell a high powered wifi radio (400mw) while others 
have the basic (100mw).


How much a difference does each of these hardware features make in 
overall wifi performance?




--
 Fred R. Goldstein  k1iofred "at" interisle.net
 Interisle Consulting Group
 +1 617 795 2701

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Jason Bailey
Higher gain,lower power works best,in almost any situation. 

 On Thursday, November 13, 2014 1:15 PM, Colton Conor 
 wrote:
   

 We are comparing multiple SOHO routers and modems that have the same Broadcom 
chipsets. All of them have 802.11N 2x2 configuration. The only differences 
between them are if they have internal or external antennas and the gain of the 
antennas (either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). In addition, some sell a high powered 
wifi radio (400mw) while others have the basic (100mw).
How much a difference does each of these hardware features make in overall wifi 
performance?
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Jack Unger

  
  
To double the communications distance
  (everything else holding steady) requires an additional 6 dB.
  Knowing this, you can do the math with the various antenna gains
  and power levels to determine performance. 
  
  Regards, 
  
  Jack Unger
  WISPA FCC Technical Consultant
  
  

On 11/13/2014 10:15 AM, Colton Conor
  wrote:


  We are comparing multiple SOHO routers and modems
that have the same Broadcom chipsets. All of them have 802.11N
2x2 configuration. The only differences between them are if they
have internal or external antennas and the gain of the antennas
(either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). In addition, some sell a high
powered wifi radio (400mw) while others have the basic (100mw).


How much a difference does each of these hardware features
  make in overall wifi performance?
  
  
  
  
  ___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless



-- 
Support Honest Gil Fulbright for Senate


Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks"
Serving the WISP Community since 1993
760-678-5033  jun...@ask-wi.com




  

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


[WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

2014-11-13 Thread Colton Conor
We are comparing multiple SOHO routers and modems that have the same
Broadcom chipsets. All of them have 802.11N 2x2 configuration. The only
differences between them are if they have internal or external antennas and
the gain of the antennas (either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). In addition, some
sell a high powered wifi radio (400mw) while others have the basic (100mw).

How much a difference does each of these hardware features make in overall
wifi performance?
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless