Upgrading router for a rural multi-building wifi/wired network

[tgl]

I don’t even know why wireless meshing is or was enabled on this system. This requires the controller running 24/7.

You sure about that? I know that using a portal page requires the controller to be up (because it runs the webserver that creates the portal page). But I thought UniFi APs were pretty autonomous for everything else, once configured.

 

[Tech9]

You sure about that?

Yes, perhaps with exception the configuration is wireless mesh always and never changes. As far as I know there is no uplink monitoring without the controller and no wired to wireless fail over/back. I checked on Ubiquiti community and some say the network keeps going with the controller powered off, but I can't guarantee this statement is valid for all AP models and scenarios. I can't test the theory since the controller on my network is built into UCG and I have no option to turn it off.

 

[tgl]

As far as I know there is no uplink monitoring without the controller and no wired to wireless fail over/back.

Hmm. The "connectivity monitor" behavior, where an AP drops offline if it can't ping a specified address, is surely done by the APs themselves. There may be aspects of this that require the controller to be involved, but I don't know details since I don't use wireless uplinks myself.

I checked on Ubiquiti community and some say the network keeps going with the controller powered off, but I can't guarantee this statement is valid for all AP models and scenarios. I can't test the theory since the controller on my network is built into UCG and I have no option to turn it off.

I've got a separate Cloud Key, and I know quite well that my APs keep chugging along when the CK is off or rebooting. But as said, the APs are all wired, so maybe the answer is different if they're not. I've not seen anybody mention any such behavior on the https://community.ui.com/ forums, though.

 

[Tech9]

You are probably right, but this is unlikely the only issue @vinylgrrl has. There are multiple points of failure in this system including aging outdoor equipment. I believe 10+ years of service time calls for an upgrade.

 

[Digilog]

Its installation choices that basically causing the system to degrade by age. The ubiquity APs would probably work for the next decade but it was this wired network That should have been fiber in the first place.

There are not many routers that have high power driving ports for long runs because they don't want to deal with the heat they give off. But the best lowest price router that would do this would be a Ubiquity Edge router (any new or old). Other options include putting an industrial switch so it will drive the net properly and allow the long runs (+300 feet) to be upgraded to a fiber run. For harsh environments I would recommend TRENDnet TI-G5062. If the router is in a regular environment, then a TEG-S562 will work at the router and existing switch locations long with fiber SPF+ port modules .

There are cheap no name brand switches that have high power ports. Most of them are used for POE cameras, but they are not going to have a lifetime warranty like the TRENDnet switches and would probably have to replace them 5-10 years down the road.

 

[vinylgrrl]

Hi all, many many apologies for my late update! (weather was not great for doing the work, plus some personal stuff came up, so we were limping along on our old router for a while)

We added the suggested switch and the APs still stopped broadcasting after exactly 2 minutes (I timed it). So then I started comparing router settings. The old Dlink used xxx.xxx.0.1 for its IP, BUT the new Netgear router uses xxx.xxx.1.1. A quick change of the Netgear's IP address to xxx.xxx.0.1 fixed the problem and all APs are behaving nicely and all wired/wireless connections receive the full 25 Mbps. I can't believe that it was such a minor thing that needed correcting, but at least it's all working now.

Once we make sure this network structure is stable (I'll let it run for a week under our normal load) we'll go ahead and order a Cloud Gateway to replace the Netgear. Again, many thanks for all the suggestions and assistance!

ETA: And yes, our longest cable run (>300') gets all 25Mbps no problem. We did pull all new underground cables (in conduit) because it was definitely past time to do so. Not sure why running fiber was suggested....kind of overkill for what we need and our ISP connection. I doubt we'll ever have Gbit access out here.. 25Mbps is pretty darn good, all things considered.

 

[degrub]

fiber to avoid ground loop issues if the box on the far end has its power from a locally grounded panel separate from the main building. If both the neutral and safety ground are provided by the house main panel, then no worries. It's only if there are two grounds in the system that can be at different earth potentials will you get the issue. However, those distances mentioned above are a little far for common ground/earth if you are in lightning country.

 

[tgl]

What @degrub said. The argument for fiber here is not to improve performance, it's to improve the odds that your equipment will still be alive after the next nearby lightning strike. Copper conducts surges, fiber doesn't.

 

[vinylgrrl]

if you are in lightning country.

We are definitely not in lightning country, haha. Very rare around here (thankfully, due to fire risk).

 

[degrub]

Actually, it's less about the lightning issue than it is about the earth being at different potentials due to differences in composition and moisture levels. i have had modems burn out due to ground differences - and the buildings were only 100 ft apart. Anytime developing cumulus clouds pass over, they tend to create small voltage differences at the earth's surface, equal and opposite charge to what is in the cloud. When this gets large enough, you get feelers trying to reach each other from both the earth side and the cloud side as the air resistance starts to be broken down. So maybe you don't get the cloud development so much and thus not the frequency of lightning strikes, but the phenomenon still exists and will wear down electronics over time. Many times equipment is designed with a 25 volt zener diode protecting the ground portion of the circuit from reverse current due to elevated earth potential. A cable just provides a low resistance path if two grounding points are at different potentials. The current NEC method is to connect those two earthing points with a dedicated thick wire so that all electrical gear sees the same ground potential. Fiber or point to point RF signals eliminates the issue of the communications cable incorrectly serving that purpose.

 

[vinylgrrl]

Just wanted to provide a final update on this project...we installed a Cloud Gateway Ultra on Monday without a hiccup (I just had to change its IP address accordingly). All access points are behaving normally and all wired and wireless devices receive full-speed connections from our ISP.

No apparent conflicts between the controller in the gateway and our standalone older WAPs. (I mostly wanted to post this as a reference for anyone using older Unifi equipment but looking to buy a new gateway....it is possible to have older Unifi WAPs running with a CG Ultra!) We'll eventually upgrade our WAPs, but the central routing was the priority. Thank you to everyone for your assistance!

 

[Tech9]

So your older APs got recognized and adopted? What model are they?

 

[vinylgrrl]

So your older APs got recognized and adopted? What model are they?

They were 'recognized,' as in they show up in the network topology with the correct device names (e.g., "Unifi AP5 outdoor"), but they were *not* adopted by the controller (which makes sense because they're already controlled/standalone). We're running 2 Unifi AP 5GHz outdoor units and 1 Unifi AP 2.4GHz outdoor unit (all purchased between 2013 and 2016).

I don't want to control the existing WAPs with the CG Ultra, so this result is perfectly fine.

ETA: they all essentially look like this.