SOHO setups are fairly straight forward IMO. In 99.999% of all cases .11g would be perfect for internet connectivity and even casual file transfers. The only real reason for .11n is if there are a number of devices all requiring high throughput and for the most part is far ahead of its time for home use!
Wireless networks are considered "contention based" meaning they are fighting for the same network medium (the air). Unlike wired networks which have switches and routers to easily handle traffic and direct it to the correct place, wireless devices all try to communicate at once and use CSMA/CA (Collision Avoidance). If multiple devices, whether it be desktops, laptops, barcode scanners, cameras, etc try to broadcast at the same time they sense this and each wait a predetermined amount of time before trying to broadcast again. If a device is still communicating the rest of the devices stop and start the process all over again.
I design and implement WiFi infrastructures for corporations for a living, and this is where the real challenge comes into play and why I think .11n was even created in the first place. Take a retail enviroment for example, you may have many cashier's, multiple people taking inventory with wireless barcode scanners, office employee's computers, wireless printers, etc all trying to communicate simultaneously where a single AP (or even 10) just would not be enough for that many users. Very careful pre-planning and surveys goes into commercial networks to be sure that there is enough throughput for all the users in each location, that there is no interference for both the network or other devices such as a hospital, that PCI, HIPAA, or other security compliance is met, that proper antennas are used and orientated (polarization), and that cell sizes are properly thought out.
Sorry if I got a bit off topic there, but this is kind of a tough question. Going back to the first paragraph, I think .11n networks are actually doing *more HARM* than good in home enviroments because they are using an very unnecessary amount of bandwidth creating interference for neighbors.
Since WiFi was first released I have been saying this, and as I watch it grow I see serious problems down the road. Not only are more and more people adding AP's / Routers, increasing signal strength unnecessarily, but they're also chewing up unnecessary amounts of bandwidth.
Also keep in mind that everything from 2-way radio's, baby monitors, cordless phones, wireless cameras, police, fire, ambulances, emergency services, etc all share the same ISM bands (900Mhz, 2.4Ghz, 5Ghz). Well, police do have some protected and licensed frequencies but you get the idea...
I can say with nearly 100% certainty, that a simple .11b/g router is more than enough for nearly every household and small business with only a several devices. There may be a few situations where this is not true if a business can not run any type of wired network, or a large home has 5 HD Streaming devices (which would be used at the same time), etc but this simply is not the case in any of the smaller networks I have ever dealt with.
Use this for an example, I have the absolute fastest home internet connection that TWC offers @ 15Mbps with burst speeds of up to 22Mbps. Since wireless networks are half duplex (they can only send or receive at one time, but not both) the actual throughput is roughly 50% putting a .11g router at 27Mbps leaving me an extra 5Mbps extra overhead for management packets. Unless multiple users are downloading large files at the same time, I will never see a loss in internet performance!
Although I do have a .11n AP in my home network, I set it to G-Only mode when I need it and actually download faster on my laptop than my desktop with a wired Gigabit connection!
Wow, sorry for the extremely long post - just my 2 cents on what's really necessary in a home enviroment. I know I'm new here (2nd post) but I have an extensive background in RF Engineering and get a little carried away sometimes. Hope this makes sense to people, and that I'm not stepping on anyone's toes that have been around for a while - looks like you're the man around here thiggens, I'll look forward to reading some of your work
Wireless networks are considered "contention based" meaning they are fighting for the same network medium (the air). Unlike wired networks which have switches and routers to easily handle traffic and direct it to the correct place, wireless devices all try to communicate at once and use CSMA/CA (Collision Avoidance). If multiple devices, whether it be desktops, laptops, barcode scanners, cameras, etc try to broadcast at the same time they sense this and each wait a predetermined amount of time before trying to broadcast again. If a device is still communicating the rest of the devices stop and start the process all over again.
I design and implement WiFi infrastructures for corporations for a living, and this is where the real challenge comes into play and why I think .11n was even created in the first place. Take a retail enviroment for example, you may have many cashier's, multiple people taking inventory with wireless barcode scanners, office employee's computers, wireless printers, etc all trying to communicate simultaneously where a single AP (or even 10) just would not be enough for that many users. Very careful pre-planning and surveys goes into commercial networks to be sure that there is enough throughput for all the users in each location, that there is no interference for both the network or other devices such as a hospital, that PCI, HIPAA, or other security compliance is met, that proper antennas are used and orientated (polarization), and that cell sizes are properly thought out.
Sorry if I got a bit off topic there, but this is kind of a tough question. Going back to the first paragraph, I think .11n networks are actually doing *more HARM* than good in home enviroments because they are using an very unnecessary amount of bandwidth creating interference for neighbors.
Since WiFi was first released I have been saying this, and as I watch it grow I see serious problems down the road. Not only are more and more people adding AP's / Routers, increasing signal strength unnecessarily, but they're also chewing up unnecessary amounts of bandwidth.
Also keep in mind that everything from 2-way radio's, baby monitors, cordless phones, wireless cameras, police, fire, ambulances, emergency services, etc all share the same ISM bands (900Mhz, 2.4Ghz, 5Ghz). Well, police do have some protected and licensed frequencies but you get the idea...
I can say with nearly 100% certainty, that a simple .11b/g router is more than enough for nearly every household and small business with only a several devices. There may be a few situations where this is not true if a business can not run any type of wired network, or a large home has 5 HD Streaming devices (which would be used at the same time), etc but this simply is not the case in any of the smaller networks I have ever dealt with.
Use this for an example, I have the absolute fastest home internet connection that TWC offers @ 15Mbps with burst speeds of up to 22Mbps. Since wireless networks are half duplex (they can only send or receive at one time, but not both) the actual throughput is roughly 50% putting a .11g router at 27Mbps leaving me an extra 5Mbps extra overhead for management packets. Unless multiple users are downloading large files at the same time, I will never see a loss in internet performance!
Although I do have a .11n AP in my home network, I set it to G-Only mode when I need it and actually download faster on my laptop than my desktop with a wired Gigabit connection!
Wow, sorry for the extremely long post - just my 2 cents on what's really necessary in a home enviroment. I know I'm new here (2nd post) but I have an extensive background in RF Engineering and get a little carried away sometimes. Hope this makes sense to people, and that I'm not stepping on anyone's toes that have been around for a while - looks like you're the man around here thiggens, I'll look forward to reading some of your work
Last edited by a moderator:
