hi guys! Im looking to speed up connections on the wireless end of my LAN network. I transfer a LOT of huge files from PC to PC via FTP over the LAN network, sometimes via a wire, and sometimes wirelessly. My wired network is fast enough, but my wireless speeds are limited to 54Mbps (im using the standard 2Wire router that came with my AT&T internet). I want to hook up a wireless access point to my Gigabit switch and just use that and disable the wireless on the 2wire router (I'm assuming that a 300Mbps connection via wireless access point will be faster than the 54Mbps connection on the router for transferring files over the LAN only - still want the devices connected to it to still be able to access the internet though)

Assuming that the idea is correct, I need a Wireless Access point that is capable of 300Mbps (hell, i might spring for a 450Mbps if you think i should) and has a Gigabit Ethernet port for the internet. I have seen SO many of them that claim 300Mbps wireless speeds, but only have a 100Mbps Ethernet connection. Does that make sense to even do that???

Anyway, I need help finding one that suits my needs.

*300Mbps wireless speeds
*Has a 10/100/1000 Ethernet port
*WPA2
*No more than $110
*Something thats reliable and works well.


I dont really care about what brand it is, as long as it works well.


If i am totally wrong about what i need, please let me know. I dont know much about networking, so im here to learn, So please dont be too critical on my lack of knowledge

_________________
I want to work with the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and standardize a WTF protocol. It would literally be a "What The F**k" protocol for when NO ONE can figure out where the f**k something went wrong.

Non-Cisco forum http://networkinghelp.freeforums.org/index.php

I think we should start with cutting through the marketing mumbo jumbo first.

300Mbps is an AGGRREATE number. That means it's the value of data transfers in BOTH directions. In actual fact you can only expect 150Mbps in a single direction over an 802.11n network.

The 300Mbps is also using wide band channels (40MHz) instead of the usual narrow channels (20MHz). Actually doing this may or may not even be a good idea depending on what is already in the air around you. It can have a negative effect on your transfer speeds if you don't properly check the air waves around you before you enable it.

The 450Mbps is also an aggregate value, and uses 3x3:3 MIMO streams. I don't know of an actual client that is capable of that... And there are only just AP's that are actually capable of it coming out now. 3x3:3 means 3 transmit antennas, 3 receive antennas, and 3 spatial streams.

So set your expectations properly. Understand the numbers on the box, and don't believe everything you hear.

You can spend tons of money on an AP, but you also needs clients that can match it to get good performance out of it.

_________________
blog.brokennetwork.ca

thanks for the info. So with all that in mind, would the concept still work?

Now understanding that 300Mbps means 150Mbps up and 150Mbps down (is that correct?) It would still be a LOT faster than my 54Mbps connection wouldn't it? I'm not expecting wired speeds, just something better than what iv got.

I still want something with a 10/100/1000 rated Ethernet port on the access point. You also point out the channel frequency. How would i go about checking to make sure its a good idea to use that range?

_________________
I want to work with the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and standardize a WTF protocol. It would literally be a "What The F**k" protocol for when NO ONE can figure out where the f**k something went wrong.

Non-Cisco forum http://networkinghelp.freeforums.org/index.php

_________________
I want to work with the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and standardize a WTF protocol. It would literally be a "What The F**k" protocol for when NO ONE can figure out where the f**k something went wrong.

Non-Cisco forum http://networkinghelp.freeforums.org/index.php

What is the rating for the laptop's N 150 ?
I would not waste my coin on those fancy over rated 300 or 450 devices if the laptop can only do the 150.
They all have a 100 Mbps lan port because in reality the unit can't produce more than that on the wireless side.
The 150 N 2x2 stuff I have tested can handle almost 90Mb one way. On 5 Ghz .

I dont think any vendor ships N accesspoints with 100mb lan ports.

Sent from my Arc.

_________________
som om sinnet hade svartnat för evigt.

well, my laptop does have a 10/100/1000 LAN RJ45 port, and i have clocked the speeds that i could do at over 100Mbps. If need be i would upgrade my laptop's Wireless NIC (which i just recently found out i can do) to take advantage of higher speeds. But its not just laptops that will be connected to this AP, it would be High end Desktops as well. Something that would certainly have the power and speed required to max out the bandwidth of the access point.

_________________
I want to work with the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and standardize a WTF protocol. It would literally be a "What The F**k" protocol for when NO ONE can figure out where the f**k something went wrong.

Non-Cisco forum http://networkinghelp.freeforums.org/index.php

So, any particular ones i should be looking for?

_________________
I want to work with the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and standardize a WTF protocol. It would literally be a "What The F**k" protocol for when NO ONE can figure out where the f**k something went wrong.

Non-Cisco forum http://networkinghelp.freeforums.org/index.php

http://www.netgear.com/home/products/wi ... fault.aspx one of these that suits your needs and have decent dd-wrt support. I've got a WNDR3700 that works great.

_________________
som om sinnet hade svartnat för evigt.

Forgive me, for i don't quite understand, But i think i need to be looking for something that's just a wireless access point, not a router. Although they do look nice. I just need a device through which i can connect to my switch that allows wireless devices to connect.

_________________
I want to work with the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and standardize a WTF protocol. It would literally be a "What The F**k" protocol for when NO ONE can figure out where the f**k something went wrong.

Non-Cisco forum http://networkinghelp.freeforums.org/index.php

Pretty much all devices for home use are "routers" but you can configure them to do just bridging, which is what you want.

Sent from my Arc.

_________________
som om sinnet hade svartnat för evigt.

Perhaps it would be helpful if i showed what i was planning on doing. I have everything already connected and working except for the Wireless access point because i don't have one. Hopefully the picture makes sense. I drew the pictures using references from my CISCO book, so hopefully it will help, (even though none of my hardware is CISCO). As you can see, i only need the Wireless access point to do its one job. I was hoping to buy something thats specifically a wireless access point because thats all i would need.

_________________
I want to work with the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and standardize a WTF protocol. It would literally be a "What The F**k" protocol for when NO ONE can figure out where the f**k something went wrong.

Non-Cisco forum http://networkinghelp.freeforums.org/index.php

I understand what you're trying to accomplish, but there arent' that many pure APs for home use. Netgear for example got this one and only: http://www.netgear.com/home/products/sw ... N802T.aspx but it will be more expensive than buying say a WNDR3700 and making it into a pure AP.

So if you want to spend the money, go ahead, theres and acces point for you.

_________________
som om sinnet hade svartnat för evigt.

yeah, i seem to have a hard time finding straight up wireless access points. I guess i just figured that something that does 1 job would be less expensive than something that does multiple jobs. How would i go about turning a router into a Wireless access point?

_________________
I want to work with the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and standardize a WTF protocol. It would literally be a "What The F**k" protocol for when NO ONE can figure out where the f**k something went wrong.

Non-Cisco forum http://networkinghelp.freeforums.org/index.php

I'd recommend something that supports DD-WRT (http://www.dd-wrt.com/site/support/router-database), there you just disable all the routing stuff and create a bridge between the wired and wireless interfaces and you're off.

_________________
som om sinnet hade svartnat för evigt.