You drop off faster since the radiation from the antenna is 30% above horizon most likely. Try tilting your antenna down toward where you need more signal.

Cheers,
Cliff

On Jun 22, 2004, at 6:05 PM, Florin Andrei wrote:

On Tue, 2004-06-22 at 16:54, Jason Chang wrote:

I think it is better to worry about computing your "total path loss"
rather than getting fired up on the biggest loudest talker. Also consider
an external antenna, either omni or directional. (ergo what are you
trying to accomplish?)

Think - large house, spread out horizontally, with a pool nearby and a
party area. The WiFi field should cover the outdoors areas, but also get
to the inside.
The total area is not perfectly circular, but almost.


I put the AP on top of the building (it's a one-story thing), not in the
center of the total area, but about 1/3 to one edge. It's reaching fine
to the rooms underneath and to the areas nearby, but the strength
decreases rapidly. In any case, decreases much faster than i've been
made to believe from the specs.
I figured i probably need an AP three times more powerful.


To answer your question: On APs, I like the Orinocos. Maybe you can eval
your needs via this link?
http://www.seattlewireless.net/index.cgi/HardwareComparison

Well, what i need is something much more powerful, and kinda omnidirectional.

Behind the AP there's a dual-homed Linux box acting as a traffic
controller (provides authentication and whatnot).

--
Florin Andrei

http://florin.myip.org/

_______________________________________________
BAWUG's general wireless chat mailing list
[unsubscribe] http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

--
"Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone."
- John Maynard Keynes


_______________________________________________
BAWUG's general wireless chat mailing list
[unsubscribe] http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to