~$400 budget: best setup for two floors, connected via Ethernet?

[ikjadoon]

Hello, mates. I'm coming from a venerable Linksys E4200; I have become disillusioned with the Netgear Orbi RBK50 (i.e., I was plagued with the constant disconnection issues), so I'm jumping straight to the deep-end: wired backhaul with multiple access points.

Goals:

1. Reliable, strong 2.4GHz and 5GHz WiFi across two floors (first floor: 3500 sq ft with 4 large interior walls; second floor: 1500 sq ft with 6 small interior walls)
2. Ethernet backhaul between APs; APs on a single SSID with a handoff "system" (i.e., support for 802.11v, r, and k) to nudge clients onto the stronger AP
3. The old, traditional features: UPnP (port forwarding if needed), configurable without an internet connection, DHCP reservation, and IPv6. Web management on a PC would be preferred, but I guess everybody's doing apps--as long as they work without an internet connection, I'll live.

Room-wise, it's 10 rooms + living areas. The Linksys E4200 works good enough in the middle 66% of the house, but throughput drops to 5-10Mbps (or zero) in the outer rooms. The Orbi offered excellent coverage and speed, but too weak reliability. Clients-wise, we're moderately connected (~20 clients): six Android/iPhones/iPads, seven laptops, an Xbox One (wired), Roku, TiVo, Kindle, Linksys security cam, and a garage door opener (wired). Client use cases are streaming, VOIP, general web browsing, and online gaming (via the Xbox).

What are the options I'm looking at?

Google WiFi w/ Ethernet? Eero Pro 2nd gen w/ Ethernet? Ubiquiti sounded too complex for a home user and 2.4GHz was weak. Will just two high-performance non-mesh-oriented routers cause any headaches with single SSID or handoffs, if setup as extenders? Or do you need a "mesh" system to allow for that kind of seamless roaming?

The home isn't wired for Ethernet, so if I can keep the number of wires running between the floors low, it'd save me a few weekends of work, haha, but I'll suffer if I need to.

 

[degrub]

floor plan sketch with rough dimensions would help.
What are thick walls constructed from ?

 

[ikjadoon]

floor plan sketch with rough dimensions would help.
What are thick walls constructed from ?

Great questions. Let me work on these and I will post them tomorrow! Thank you for the reply!

 

[thiggins]

GWiFi can't operate in AP mode. So it will introduce a double-NAT configuration and separate your Wi-Fi and wired traffic.

Run the Ethernet as central to the two floors as you can. If you can't do that, a run at each end of the house is next best.

No system is going to guarantee trouble-free client roaming because the client is in charge. 802.11kvr help only with speed of the roam. The client always decides when to roam unless the AP forces it to disassociate.

 

[ikjadoon]

floor plan sketch with rough dimensions would help.
What are thick walls constructed from ?

Thank you both for the replies.

I apologize for the delay; the blueprints took a while to find.

The walls are simple wood with drywall on top (maybe some metal for the HVAC vents). The height is 16 feet total; 8 feet per floor; there's a basement (another 8 feet), but strong WiFi isn't needed there.

(I drew in a bedroom that we added later).

GWiFi can't operate in AP mode. So it will introduce a double-NAT configuration and separate your Wi-Fi and wired traffic.

Run the Ethernet as central to the two floors as you can. If you can't do that, a run at each end of the house is next best.

No system is going to guarantee trouble-free client roaming because the client is in charge. 802.11kvr help only with speed of the roam. The client always decides when to roam unless the AP forces it to disassociate.

Oh, shucks on the GWiFi. I did not know that; we'll avoid that one, then. Not the worst thing, but I like to think simpler networks work better.

Ethernet: yes, true. We're heading up to the attic this weekend and seeing if we can piggy back any conduits. Our modem can connect to two coax outlets (not all, as we had some connectivity issues sending the signal to all coax lines in the house): the top left of the Great Room or near the middle bathroom on the 2nd floor.

Roaming: Yes, true! I've read this. We're hoping to get the WiFi system doing the most it can for the myriad of clients, but that final decision, we hope our clients behave well enough.

 

[ikjadoon]

All right, after probably too much time reading SNB reviews, these two articles have explained a few things:

1. https://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wir...es/33135-router-or-wi-fi-system-how-to-choose (a very timely article! thank you, @thiggins)

2. https://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wir...iti-ac-pro-and-ac-lite-access-points-reviewed (supposedly the "upgrade" to today's WiFi Systems)

My conclusions so far:

1. The backhaul is key with multiple APs; 1Gbps Ethernet should solve that instantly. Any wired client will be connected "directly" to the modem.

2. Underpowered 2x2 routers can't compete with 4x4 routers, even if all clients are 2x2 or even 1x1 (better signal to noise ratio).

3. Ubiquiti APs can't (or maybe weren't intended to) provide relatively strong 2.4GHz coverage through walls; even the Orbi system outperforms it!

4. Totally unrelated: decided to add a Synology NAS to our network. So, it'll be 3 wired clients.

Next steps:

1. Find the most reliable, strongest 4x4 AC router. Buy two.

2. Connect 1st to modem, connect 1st to 2nd with the 100ft Ethernet cable, and set the 2nd to AP mode. Put one on each floor to mitigate interference; central locations will be difficult with wiring, sadly, so maybe we can put them on opposite ends.

Questions:

1. Any router features that'd be particularly helpful for dual routers? AP mode is essentially a must, DFS sounds handy (though we do have an army base a few miles down the road--does this make it moot?), band steering to manage the possibly six radios, modifiable transmit power might help avoid overlap, and finally reliable and trustworthy auto channel selection would save some time instead of changing possibly six radios periodically.

2. One SSID seems preferable, because of synced timing to avoid packet collision. But then here it says two SSIDs are better, as most clients are sticky. I guess just try both and see what works better for us?

3. If one SSID, are these all the best practices?

1. Ensure AP mode is working on 2nd router (i.e., only one DHCP server active w/o conflicts)
2. Ensure 2nd router has a static IP address.
3. Ensure SSID and security setup are identical.
4. Ensure different channels for both 2.4GHz radios (needed for 5GHz, too?).

----

All in all, I'm excited for more wired clients and finally moving past 2.4Ghz 802.11n. Our poor E4200 went down twice tonight.

If anyone has recommendations for routers, I'm all ears. The Synology RT2600ac looks solid; the "meh" 5GHz downlink performance does feel compromising, however.

 

[pege63]

Well there is also the TP-Link EAP AP Series, the signal strength is twice to the Ubiquiti APs.

 

[thiggins]

A few suggestions.

- Don't use auto channel selection. It typically works only during start up. Some algorithms also do wonky things like set 2.4 GHz channels to something other than 1, 6, 11.
- Set 2.4 GHz to 20 MHz bandwidth
- Any router can be switched to AP mode https://www.smallnetbuilder.com/bas...onvert-a-wireless-router-into-an-access-point
- Start with single SSID, but be prepared to fall back to multiple SSIDs. It all depends on your devices' roaming algorithms.
- If you are near someplace that uses radar, DFS will not be of much use.
- Remember in AP mode, you will not have access to router features (QoS, parental control, etc.)
- 4x4 is not a must. 3x3 APs will also provide better performance than 2x2

 

[pege63]

And its up to klients/devices if they have the support for the SS, CH on the bandwidths "low, middle, high" and so on so on.
Your router lets say setup to Ch 128, 80 MHz, but your client can only see Ch 36-64, so its also up to the client FREQ support.

 

[ikjadoon]

Well there is also the TP-Link EAP AP Series, the signal strength is twice to the Ubiquiti APs.

Oh, nice find. Thank you for the suggestion. Sadly, they all have only one Ethernet port, which would be used by the backhaul. I checked their manuals, but there doesn't seem to way to jigger the Ethernet port to support both the backhaul and wired clients. Maybe just add switches? Though then...we might as well buy a traditional WiFi router, eh?

A few suggestions.

- Don't use auto channel selection. It typically works only during start up. Some algorithms also do wonky things like set 2.4 GHz channels to something other than 1, 6, 11.
- Set 2.4 GHz to 20 MHz bandwidth
- Any router can be switched to AP mode https://www.smallnetbuilder.com/bas...onvert-a-wireless-router-into-an-access-point
- Start with single SSID, but be prepared to fall back to multiple SSIDs. It all depends on your devices' roaming algorithms.
- If you are near someplace that uses radar, DFS will not be of much use.
- Remember in AP mode, you will not have access to router features (QoS, parental control, etc.)
- 4x4 is not a must. 3x3 APs will also provide better performance than 2x2

Thank you for the suggestions.

Good point on the channels. We'll set them manually, as seemingly 1 and 11 seem like the best channels anyways. And definitely, yes, good reminder: 20MHz or we might as well be stuck on overlapping channels anyways. I forget some routers default to 20/40.

I seeeeee. I didn't realize it was that simple to set it up. Good vibes.

Shucks, right. I imagine they use radar, but maybe I can find the "chicken/egg" solution to the DFS channels.

Yes. I don't feel optimistic about one SSID and I asked the folks if they'd mind two SSIDs: they seemed amiable, but I imagine they'll be forgetful, too. Alas, it seems like only mesh systems offer anything in terms of roaming nudging (even if it isn't perfect). What can you do?

AP mode settings: I am confused about this: QoS is either client-based or traffic-based, right? Couldn't I set these things on the 1st router (in router mode)? Will those settings not apply to clients connected through the Ethernet backhaul -> 2nd router (AP mode)? And the same for parental control: aren't these 2nd-router-clients still...eh...clients of the 1st router? That is, if I understand right, the first router (router mode) won't have access to the MAC addresses of clients connected to the 2nd router (AP mode)? All the 2nd-router-clients are seen as one big amorphous "client" (i.e., MAC address) to the main router?

True, right. 3x3 is definitely workable, too. I'd like 4x4 (as hopefully this setup will last us another 5+ years), but not a deal-breaker if it's 3x3.

And its up to klients/devices if they have the support for the SS, CH on the bandwidths "low, middle, high" and so on so on.
Your router lets say setup to Ch 128, 80 MHz, but your client can only see Ch 36-64, so its also up to the client FREQ support.

Good points, to keep in mind, yes. We're hoping to make the WiFi system the "chicken" here, so we can keep it 5+ years and we rotate newer clients in (once we got rid of the Wii, every client is at least 802.11n and at least half are 5GHz-compatible). We presume our clients will be able to exploit the newer features of the router over time. But, it seems like the top routers now are already offering MU-MIMO, IPv6, etc., too, so it's not necessarily a compromise between "Good performance now" and "Good performance later", with 802.11ac maturing and what-not.

That is, if it's an older client, no worries--we aren't expecting great performance anyways. But we have three MU-MIMO clients in the house, at least 10+ 802.11AC clients, and at least 12+ 5GHz clients. But, we've been living off 2.4GHZ 802.11N with very limited QoS.

-----------------------

Happy update: we (85%) wired the Ethernet (singular: just one cable) today! It took a while as we had to work around four "floors" of "inside the wall" space, buy a rope ladder, drill through a few planks, and at one point, we barely fit a rope to climb out of the 6-foot drop. An adventure for sure and little bits of insulation are all around the house, haha.

The location for the drops: 2nd floor middle bedroom and left-middle wall of the Great Room. We'll wrap up tomorrow as needed to finish the last 15%.

------------------------

Still unsure on the routers/access points. If we up our budget to maybe $550, is that putting us in any better position? The ASUS RT-5300AC, while an unsightly hut of antennas, seemed solid sans the MU-MIMO deficiency.

Synology RT2600ac still seems pretty solid; I wish it'd have had stronger/longer range 5GHz, but maybe with two of them, we can partially make up for it. Gotta say, if Synology setup a nice mesh system with an Ethernet backhaul (maybe also with link aggregation support?), I'd easily pay $350 or more for each one. I'm falling in love with their SRM software.

 

[pege63]

You could use a N router as AP, just for the older devices that goes with the LOW band on the 5GHz band and if you maybe have some G wifi printer on the 2.4GHz band.
Then buy a tri-band router for the newer clients on AC that supports low, middle, high on the 5GHz band.
Just a suggestion to keep in mind.

 

[thiggins]

Why are you looking for two ports on APs? APs typically do not support backhaul bridge simultaneously.

When you have multiple APs, range of each one isn't as important. In fact, as others have pointed out, you may want LESS power to avoid overlap and client roaming confusion.

One simple instruction for users is to turn Wi-Fi off then on again if they have a crappy connection. That will force the device to reassociate.

 

[ikjadoon]

You could use a N router as AP, just for the older devices that goes with the LOW band on the 5GHz band and if you maybe have some G wifi printer on the 2.4GHz band.
Then buy a tri-band router for the newer clients on AC that supports low, middle, high on the 5GHz band.
Just a suggestion to keep in mind.

Oh, that's not a bad idea at all. I've actually considered this, but our E4200 seems to be on its last legs. Once we switched to the Orbi, for a few days, we realized what we were missing (the Orbi disconnects affected the Satellite clients and were far more numerous) the E4200 dies each night and all clients, wired and wireless, go kaput until the router can essentially reboot itself.

If the E4200 still had reliable juice left, I'd spin it up as an AP no doubt. As a test, I was curious how it ended up in SNB's charts. It's actually the slowest router with data still available, haha. Bottom of revision 7. The Synology, on average, has 16x higher throughput on average on 5GHz and 8x higher on 2.4Ghz.

On average, the actually updated E4200v2/EA4500 (we have the older E4200v1) got 13Mbps on 5GHz and 12Mbps on 2.4GHz. We pay Time Warner for 20Mbps a month.

Why are you looking for two ports on APs? APs typically do not support backhaul bridge simultaneously.

When you have multiple APs, range of each one isn't as important. In fact, as others have pointed out, you may want LESS power to avoid overlap and client roaming confusion.

One simple instruction for users is to turn Wi-Fi off then on again if they have a crappy connection. That will force the device to reassociate.

Ah, right; initially, I expected mesh 'access points' (i.e., the eero Pro WiFi or GWiFi) would've been the best system as they've wired backhaul and another downstream Ethernet port (where a switch could've been added). I hadn't thought of the more typical access points when I wrote the post, save Ubiquiti.

It comes down to two things: 1) our house isn't pre-wired for Ethernet, so at best, we could get two wired APs strung together: we've only added one drop between the floors each and it took at least 10 hours, excluding the numerous trips to Lowe's. So with the two AP locations, we want to make the most we can. And two seems like the best fit for our house's size, right?

Then, 2) isn't too much range a better problem to have? My thought process: in most "traditional" (non-mesh) routers, transmit power is adjustable. I'd rather have too much range and walk it back than still struggle with corner spots (i.e., the Master Bedroom or the Linksys camera outside the house). The range problem seems software adjustable, right?

I haven't found any router + switch + access point setup giving similar range at similar price point to a dual WiFi router setup (one router + one AP), right? Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places? The "traditional" AP model, with a single Ethernet port, is still very workable as switches won't cost too much, either, and we'd get some roaming assistance (which is seemingly better than nothing). But I just haven't found it yet: I'd rather underwork a powerful system than strain a weaker one. I'm searching every day, but maybe I'm just missing some things.

The dual Synology's would be $420 total, which is ~$70 more than we paid for Orbi RBK50, but we're gaining Ethernet backhaul (i.e., reliability and speed) now instead of some unknown future moment, far better software (at least for what I'd like to see), an extra Gigabit Ethernet port (i.e., 8 usable instead of 7), and a decent bump in 2.4GHz and 5GHz WiFi throughput over attenuation (roughly 10% to 30%) according to Revision 9 tests.

Are we at diminishing returns with the 2nd full-fat WiFi router -> AP mode? Absolutely. But we're likely to keep the system for another 7 years, too. Am I thinking about this in a weird way? It seems to make sense to me, but I might be too deep in my own BS to notice it.

---

That's a fantastic idea with the roaming, actually; turning WiFi on and off is much easier and on Android, you can plop a widget down no problem. On iOS devices, too, actually, you can just swipe up to Control Center. Laptops are a bit trickier, but by the time you're in the WiFi settings, you can whip into the right AP without much trouble.

 

[pege63]

And in the end it does not matter if you have a top noch WIFI, if your clinets does not support wath you have to offer them in frq, ch and so on so on.

Have you looked at the ASUS BRT-AC828 its a SOHO router, it has everything you could wish for from a wifi router.
Then a Netgear EXT8000 would be something to look at too.
For the N+G clients if they are a lot i would settle with a dualband 450+450 router/APs.

Orbi RBK50, Velop should also be something to thinking about, its about the clinets as mobilephones, laptops, tablets, games consols, you name it, wath they have inside.

 

[thiggins]

Even with mesh nodes, Ethernet functions either as a network connection for backhaul OR a wireless bridge connection. Nodes probe the connection and adjust themselves accordingly.

APs and converted routers aren't as smart.

The dual ports would be good only to daisy chain to another AP, not to support wireless bridge. Since you have Ethernet to the physical location anyway, you don't need a wireless bridge.

7 years is a long time in Wi-Fi... I'd think shorter term and make an incremental step within your budget. Get a 4x4 router, then try some other solutions for the extension node.

In any case, don't expect perfect roaming. As I said, it is largely up to the client...

 

[ikjadoon]

And in the end it does not matter if you have a top noch WIFI, if your clinets does not support wath you have to offer them in frq, ch and so on so on.

Have you looked at the ASUS BRT-AC828 its a SOHO router, it has everything you could wish for from a wifi router.
Then a Netgear EXT8000 would be something to look at too.
For the N+G clients if they are a lot i would settle with a dualband 450+450 router/APs.

Orbi RBK50, Velop should also be something to thinking about, its about the clinets as mobilephones, laptops, tablets, games consols, you name it, wath they have inside.

Right; as I mentioned, most of our clients had 5GHz as I did a "5GHz survey test" a few months back. However, to be sure, I just went back for a tally: we actually have 90% clients supporting 5GHz, with just a Chromebook and a security camera with only 2.4GHz (we dropped both the Wii and 1st Google Chromecast recently). That seems more than enough to warrant an upgrade. Looking at 802.11AC, over 80% support (i.e., a few dual-band 802.11n clients). It's anachronistic, but our 2011 Linksys E4200 is mostly serving 2015+ clients.

With both high-band and low-band 5GHz, we hit every client. Right? Or are you considering DFS? MU-MIMO is rare, though, and I'd be willing to give that up for a router with better reliability or throughput over distance. Is that what you might be suggesting?

--

I did not see that ASUS SOHO router, actually! What a meaty router. M.2 slot (though we're looking for RAID 1 with high-capacity spindles--that's why we're heading towards a proper NAS), 8 GbE with aggregation on input and output, VPN features out the wazoo, etc. It's more than we need in a router, but it's exciting to see these things filter down into consumer clients at some point.

The price is the kicker. I can't find a solid MSRP on it, but the estimates (~$500) take our whole budget and then some for just a single WiFi output source.

--

Right; see my OP. We bought and failed with the Orbi RBK50. The Velop was a strong contender: Ethernet backhaul, no double-NAT (presumably), living-room friendly looks, roaming assistance, and "cost-effective" ($320 for 2 units; see below). The cons, though: a single downstream Ethernet port (i.e., buy two unmanaged switches for each end), 2x2 instead of 4x4 radios (and the throughput vs attenuation results support this; 2.4GHz @ 36dB attenuation shows 79Mbps for Synology and 28Mbps for the Velop; 52Mbps vs 31Mbps w/ 5GHz @ 36dB attenuation), and the simplified app management instead of the goodness of SRM.

Cost-wise, it's what?... $20 per node for four-port GbE switches. So, $320 + $40. Velop + switches for $360 vs dual Synology for $420; $60 difference for a far better software management solution and roughly 60% to 100% faster throughput.

On the Netgear EXT8000: I presume you meant the EX8000, right? Same issue as the Orbi, which is what we were having problems with. The 5GHz backhaul has/had serious issues (in our use) and the EX8000 depends on the very same.

Even with mesh nodes, Ethernet functions either as a network connection for backhaul OR a wireless bridge connection. Nodes probe the connection and adjust themselves accordingly.

APs and converted routers aren't as smart.

The dual ports would be good only to daisy chain to another AP, not to support wireless bridge. Since you have Ethernet to the physical location anyway, you don't need a wireless bridge.

7 years is a long time in Wi-Fi... I'd think shorter term and make an incremental step within your budget. Get a 4x4 router, then try some other solutions for the extension node.

In any case, don't expect perfect roaming. As I said, it is largely up to the client...

Oh, really? Shucks; thank you for the note--if we went with nodes from mesh systems, the better solution would be two switches per floor and wire the APs through the switch.

Just to clarify, we aren't expecting to use any wireless bridges (i.e., turn any wired clients -> wireless clients). Just typical native WiFi clients and a handful of native wired clients. EDIT: wait, after re-reading your Orbi review, I now understand the context of "bridging" here.

Regarding the APs/converted routers : I had the same fear, so I called up Synology to confirm. There are separate wireless AP modes and wireless repeater modes for the Synology RT2600AC:

Wireless AP (Access Point) mode:

Under this mode (also known as the Bridge mode), your Synology Router bridges all network interfaces (LAN, wireless LAN, and WAN) and therefore has five LAN ports (LAN 1-4 and WAN) available to wired clients. In wired respects, your Synology Router is equivalent to a network switch. As a wireless AP, the router cannot assign IP addresses to the clients (the DHCP Server is disabled) and works only as a wireless transmission device, sending/receiving data via Wi-Fi between wireless and wired networks. This mode is recommended in the scenarios below:

• When your Synology Router (at LAN 1-4 or WAN port) is already connected to an ISP modem (at the LAN port) for Internet access.
• When the connected devices need wireless connection.

If I take Synology at their word, if it is a proper switch in this mode, it should also be able to figure out which Ethernet port is supplying the data (i.e., input from the modem -> router 1 -> this AP ) and which Ethernet port goes to a client (i.e., output). Right?

Agreed on 7 years. We hadn't had many AC clients a few years ago, so we left well enough alone, but now we're feeling the pinch (and a not small upgrade itch, either, haha).

I like the plan. We'll buy one 4x4 unit now (I feel confident with the Synology RT2600ac right now), see how much we like the Synology, and then plan the extension node from there. We'll buy on Amazon via the referral link, too, and that 30-day return period is far more forgiving (and less stressful) than Best Buy's scant 15 days.

And regarding roaming: true. Everyone actually seems pretty comfortable with turning WiFi on/off to reconnect to the better SSID/AP. I'll play around with a single SSID with a few clients once the Synology arrives...see if our clients can hop decently without intervention (likely doubtful, but I'm curious). Then we'll move to turning WiFi on/off.

I will say, between the two floors and a couple of walls, the E4200 connecting to an Intel 8260 Wireless card yields around -67 to -68 of signal on 2.4GHz.

 

[ikjadoon]

The (first) Synology RT-2600ac is here! It worked like a piece of cake. Two updates to install and everything went swimmingly, except for disabling WPS, which somehow locked up the SRM. After a reboot, though, it was fine and dandy. I've let everything on auto just to see how the Synology handles itself.

Not bad coverage at all so far: at high transmit power, at the same location listed above, we went from ~-66dB (I was giving real time in the previous post, but NetSpot actually calculates the average, which was -66d) to -60dB. +6dB, thus a 4x increase in signal power (this is on 2.4GHz).

Over the next few days, I'll run it through some paces with all our clients and see if we get any hiccups.