2 wireless networks with the same SSID

[spolo85]

Before I describe the issue I'm experiencing, let me first start off and explain why I have two routers broadcasting the same SSID. My main router is on the 1st floor of our house. However we have a dead spot on our top floor. So I added a 2nd router to our top floor (with an ethernet wire connecting the two) and I originally broadcasted that 2nd router with a completely different SSID and we never had any issues with doing that. However I have a bunch of NEST products and in order for them to communicate with each other under the same account's "House", they need to also share the same WIFI. This is extremely annoying and there is no way to get around this other than to setup the 2nd router as an Access Point with the same SSID (Before anyone else mentions it, I can't move the main router to alleviate the dead spot on the top floor)

I know how to manually setup a router as an access point (turn off DHCP, connect ethernet to port 1, etc) however the good news is that my Belkin AC1200 already has an "Access Point" option to turn on that does all that automatically. I also read that if you setup any Access Points near each other (or near the main router) with the same SSID that is over-lapping in signal, you need to manually setup each device's Channel so that the channel's bandwidth isn't overlapping with each other.

Since both my main router and access point are dual band routers, I set them up as such

Main Router (AC1200)
2.4GHz SSID: Polo
2.4GHz band: B/G/N
2.4GHz channel: 11
5GHz: Polo 5Ghz
5GHz: A/N/AC
5GHz channel: 165

Access Point (AC1200)
2.4GHz SSID: Polo
2.4GHz band: B/G/N
2.4GHz channel: 6
5GHz: Polo 5Ghz
5GHz: A/N/AC
5GHz channel: 149

For the most part, everything started to work just fine. However I've noticed that ever since this new setup, I sometimes get my devices choking up when loading a page or anything else internet related. Meaning that it becomes extremely sluggish for a minute or two then it's completely back to normal for a while. This seems to happen no matter which device I'm on. I have an Arlo-Q security camera and it's constantly dropping internet connection ever since this setup.

I can't imagine that my issues are unrelated to this new setup. So the question is, what did I do wrong?

 

[Ralston18]

Maybe a duplicate IP.

Are you using static IP addresses for the NEST devices and reserving IPs addresses for them? Preferably IP addresses outside the range of assignable DHCP IP addresses.

Start by looking at the camera's configuration.

If you have a wireless PC available try this:

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4000462/windows-10-analyzing-wireless-network-report

 

[spolo85]

Maybe a duplicate IP.

Are you using static IP addresses for the NEST devices and reserving IPs addresses for them? Preferably IP addresses outside the range of assignable DHCP IP addresses.

Start by looking at the camera's configuration.

If you have a wireless PC available try this:

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4000462/windows-10-analyzing-wireless-network-report

There shouldn't be any need to assign or reserve static IP addresses on any of my devices. The main router is the only device handling a DHCP server and should be doing the job fine regardless of this new setup. All i did was change the radio connectivity, not the how traffic is handled.

I actually was researching this issue a bit more this morning and I believe I now know what's happening. I believe I'm experiencing a "Roaming" Issue. Where some of my devices (at times) are staying connected to the weaker signal of the two and not switching appropriately. I'm more convinced that this is the cause because I decided that I was fed up with this issue and change the SSID on the AP to not match the main router. As soon as I did that, all my devices started to work like they should between the two WIFI signals.

I'm just surprised because business do this kind of setup all the time with multiple access points. Why are my devices handling the roaming so poorly? My iPhone works fine at my work when I "Roam" between Access Points but at home, apparently it's a challenge.

 

[bill001g]

The reason roaming works better in business is there is a central controller that is controlling all the AP. In the simplest modes it can detect that a end device is closer to a better AP and then force the end device off its current AP. It will still cause a short disruption. The very high end controller systems depend on loading special device drivers so the controller can actually control the end device.

With out controllers the end device is in complete control not the AP. The end device can not scan for AP since it is using the radio to communicate so it does not even know that any other AP exists other than the one it is talking to. Now it could drop the connection and check if there was better but then you get the constant small outages and the device may not find anything better. They way it works is there is a fixed signal level that the device decide is not good enough and then it will change. Most times this is set very low to avoid the problem of constant disconnection scanning and reconnections because nothing better is found.

 

[spolo85]

The reason roaming works better in business is there is a central controller that is controlling all the AP. In the simplest modes it can detect that a end device is closer to a better AP and then force the end device off its current AP. It will still cause a short disruption. The very high end controller systems depend on loading special device drivers so the controller can actually control the end device.

With out controllers the end device is in complete control not the AP. The end device can not scan for AP since it is using the radio to communicate so it does not even know that any other AP exists other than the one it is talking to. Now it could drop the connection and check if there was better but then you get the constant small outages and the device may not find anything better. They way it works is there is a fixed signal level that the device decide is not good enough and then it will change. Most times this is set very low to avoid the problem of constant disconnection scanning and reconnections because nothing better is found.

This makes complete sense. The articles that I was reading about "WIFI Roaming" mentioned about the need for these controllers. However what I'm confused about is that there are several articles out there (not blogs but actual help sites) outlining how to "Setup your home with 2 routers on the same SSID" but they never mention the need for these controllers. Isn't the issue of Roaming going to plague anyone who attempt this setup at home without these controllers? Do these people writing these articles understand this????

 

[bill001g]

It takes massive amounts of study to be good at most computer stuff in general. Why would you get paid almost nothing as a blogger or so called reporteer at a tech site when you can make huge money working in the industry. The only reason you get good answers here sometimes is you get tech professionals who can't sleep at night or are just bored.

Just watch some yourtube video from some of the so called "experts". There is total junk from kids still in high school that think they know something and want to be famous.

 

[Ralston18]

And another reason, for me at least, is that there is always more to learn. Either directly or finding out what I did not know or fully grasp.

Reference the preceding posts. Thank you.

With respect to static IP addresses I agree. Yet, when there are multiple devices, IoT and otherwise, it just seems to that I would want static IPs for those devices. Key devices at least. Static IPs keep track of what is what especially if adverse events have occurred and devices fall back to default/manufacturer configurations.

Or at least be able to make the decisions versus "firmware" doing it all based on the ISPs desires. Sort of a counter to what seems to be an erosion of control and configuration options for home networks. Configuration as a service.... All we may end up with is the equivalent of the infamous "check engine" light" and can no longer fix things ourselves. But that is a post for the Opinions section.

Anyway I am interested in what you think about "netsh wlan show wlanreport" and how well it presents information about your network. Do not need to or even wish to have the information per se. Mostly just if and how well the report sums things up. Thanks.