Which access point to create Tomato WLAN (seamless) roaming?

[mensa]

Hello,

I use a Asus RT-N66U with Tomato Shibby firmware and to expand my WLAN on another floor. I have a network cable to the other floor and want to install an access point there to make my WLAN coverage bigger. Can you please tell me which access point I should buy? Should I also install Tomato Shibby on the access point to have good compatibility? Or can I use any access point and use the same SSID + different channel? Would be fine if there would be also 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz simultan.

Is also seamless WLAN roaming possible?

 

[stevech]

WiFi roaming has good and bad

The client device must decide when to change from a currently selected access point (AP) to another. Every WiFi router has an AP built-in; no difference in this and a non-router AP, from the client device's viewpoint.

I recommend giving each AP (router included) a unique SSID. Maybe your initials and the room, like abcFloor2 or abcLR, abcFR.
Put them all on the same channel is best. But not if you have sustained heavy traffic on one. Use channels 1, 6 and 11 (2.4GHz band). Avoid a channel where there's a neighbor that's a really heavy user. Lightly used neighbor-SSIDs are no concern.

Any WiFi router can be reconfigured to be an AP. See the FAQ on that on the top level of this web site.

Connect each AP to the router via cat5 cable (best) or HomePlug (IP over power wires) or MoCA (IP over TV coax). See those sections here in this forum.

As to roaming: WiFi clients have not "rules" or standards on when they seek a better AP. Most stay with an AP with any kind of usable signal, even when there's a much superior AP, as a person moves with a handheld. So, the USER can choose best-AP by knowing the SSIDs and where those APs are located vs. where the user is in the home. It's up to the user to decide which AP to use and when to switch.

Tomato/DD-WRT not needed.

 

[mensa]

But when I ask for seamless WLAN roaming I am not interested to choose the AP everytime by myself, when I move around! I want that the device will do that automatically!

So I read very often to use everywhere the same SSID, but different channels.

 

[coxhaus]

You can use the same SSID and different channels for what seems like seamless integration for a laptop or iPhone. I do this currently at my house. True seamless integration is not going to happen unless you use something like a high end Cisco wireless system which is not practical for home use. Two APs same SSID are not seamless in that they cannot maintain VOIP call across multiple APs. You will end up with a dropped call.

 

[mensa]

Ok, thanks for the information.
I know, that Cisco can handle that seamless stuff. But why isn't it possible for the Tomato- or DD-WRT-Guys to integrate that also into their firmwares?
Is extra hardware needed or to complicated to program?

 

[coxhaus]

I think the problem is there is no controller to be able to make one AP drop the connection and force the other AP to pick up the connection.

Maybe the card manufactures like Intel could program in settings to allow you on your laptop to control which AP to connect to.

 

[stevech]

But when I ask for seamless WLAN roaming I am not interested to choose the AP everytime by myself, when I move around! I want that the device will do that automatically!

So I read very often to use everywhere the same SSID, but different channels.

WiFi does not, cannot do automatic best-AP selection. Because IEEE 802.11 does not specify it must be done, nor how. (expensive controller-based WiFi solves this shortcoming).

So to help the USER choose APs, it's best to give each one a different SSID so the USER can see which one to choose. If you put the same SSID on different channels, the USER cannot see which AP to choose.

 

[sfx2000]

I do seamless roaming on my home network - presently based on Apple's Airport implementation.

You're right that 802.11 doesn't explicitly do this, but 802 does... just depends on implementation

 

[Mark Uhde]

I do seamless roaming on my home network - presently based on Apple's Airport implementation.

You're right that 802.11 doesn't explicitly do this, but 802 does... just depends on implementation

You aren't doing seamless roaming. BTW, I agree with the OP - using multiple SSIDs is my idea of insanity. It's not user-friendly, it doesn't work well, and it's annoying as can be.

Here's how to prove you're not doing seamless roaming. Start up a VoIP app on your phone and make a call. Walk outside the coverage of the original AP. The call will drop more often than not. Not seamless roaming.

A lot better than using multiple SSIDs? Yes. Good enough for 95% of applications? Yes. Seamless? No.