eyal__L

Honorable
Aug 17, 2016
9
0
10,510
0
Hey good people,

Our main connection is in the cellar but there are cables going through the walls in every floor (Kath7). I'd imagine we need a modem (without Wifi) for the cellar and then some kind of stations in every floor - I would like to use the existing cables rather than depend on mesh or wifi extenders which I imagine would limit the speed and also cost more?

I imagine a system build on a main modem connected to three stations on different floors, if possible all using the same system (but not necessarily) but can't really see any system that seems to fit this idea.

Can any one suggest what type of hardware I should look for?

Thanks!
 
I would hope you do not have "cat7" cables in the walls. Actual cat7 cable is expensive and extremely hard to terminate properly to wall jacks. Most cat7 cable you find being sold is fake cable.

If you can see the cables check the marking on the side. Most cable will say EIA/TIA and the CAT marking. It will also like say CU and the wire size AWG and you want between 22-24. If there are no markings that is a bad indicator. Also if the cable says CCA that is not valid ethernet cable.

So if we assume you have you have valid cabling the electronics are fairly simple. You need a modem and a router in the basement. These many times have both units in a single box but people call them only a modem by mistake. You do not really need wifi but finding modem/routers without wifi tends to be hard so you could either turn off the wifi radios or just leave it on.

Most routers have at least 4 lan port on them. So you would plug between the router and the cables going to the remote floors.

To get wifi in the remote location you need what is called a AP. This is just a simple device that has a ethernet port and wifi radios. Actual AP tend to be more expensive because they have feature you may not need. You can use a inexpensive router with a number in the 1200-1750 and use it as a AP. Most have a option to run them as a AP but any router can be used as a AP.

That really is all there is to it. You can set the SSID on the remote router/ap to either be all the same or you can make them different. It is pretty much a personal preference. When you make them the same you run the risk of the device staying connected to the wrong radio if you move around the house. Making them different means you the person rather than some stupid software can control where you connect but you now have the added complexity of having to tell the device to change. All depends which of these 2 problem you think is worse and if you do not move device much then both are minor inconvenience.
 
Reactions: eyal__L

eyal__L

Honorable
Aug 17, 2016
9
0
10,510
0
Firstly, thank you ever so kindly! it's all great input.

(they charged us for Cat7, in Germany they say kat7, so I really hope that's what's in the wall!)

any chance you can suggest a couple of names of specific hardware so I get a tech reference to aim for?
 
If you want actual AP get uniquiti other wise just get any of the better brands of consumer routers. All you are going to use is the wifi part and they pretty much all use the same wifi chipset when they have the same "number/speed" on the box.
 

eyal__L

Honorable
Aug 17, 2016
9
0
10,510
0
Fair enough, as I think we are capped at about 250Mbits at source anyhow, so the 400 vs 300 question doesn't really seem that important.

I think I want to go with AP as it's simpler for my non tech-savvy mind - I can get tp-link tl-wa801n for about 10$ each - so it seems reasonable? not sure how much cheaper I can go with converting routers.
 
The reason they sell the for so little is they are extremely old technology.

They are very slow compared to modern equipment. You only get a tiny fraction of the so called "speed" number they put on the box. Maybe you might get 30-50mbps on those devices. Even a box that has a 1200 number on it will likely not get much over 200mbps.

If you need performance I would use ethernet cables for those devices.
 

eyal__L

Honorable
Aug 17, 2016
9
0
10,510
0
Well, ethernet is only viable in a two of the three floors - I was thinking of a switch type thing where i can both connect directly to the cable but also provide wifi (there's quite a few possible users with mobile phones and laptops).

So let me understand - I would anyhow get a friction of the speed? Is it better than to get a lower speed as it would be chepaer and doesn't really matter?
 
You could place a cheap 5 port switch in from of the AP that would give you extra ethernet ports. If you are willing to use 10/100 you can get them for under $10. 10/100/1000 cost about $20. The $10 AP only have 10/100 ports on them already.

Not sure you can get something that cheap but you could use a router as a AP. You would then get extra ports to use for ethernet stuff.
 
In very general terms a AP and router use the same wifi chips. It gets hard to say when you are looking at equipment that costs $10. If you were to buy pretty much any $50 you would get good performance. When you look at very old technology there was more difference between units. Now days they have figured out all the tricks and the cost of the radio chips has dropped a lot even though they are much more advanced.

As long as you do not buy those completely unknown brands shipped directly from china you should get good results. Since you are not actually going to be using the router part you can get something pretty basic. Most the fancy features say like parental controls or NAS support only work when it runs as a router.

If you want cheap I would look to buy used product from tplink or asus. Something like ac1200 devices should be possible to get pretty cheap since all the newest technology is 802.11ax (ie wifi6).
 

eyal__L

Honorable
Aug 17, 2016
9
0
10,510
0
I hear you, though just to say - I don't look to buy 10$ units, I just said that as it's so cheap, I wouldn't bother with looking for routers as they can't possibly be cheaper,

I don't mind paying 50$ if that's the best value for price I can get
 
You should have good lucky with any of the major brands. What you are looking for is good customer support in case you get a unit that dies. You also want software support but most routers in this price range use stuff that has all the bug worked out.

The manufactures will change the internal parts but keep the name on the box the same. This is more a issue for someone wanting to use third party firmware but I got burned with this so I tend to not give exact models.

Asus is great product but they tend to be the most expensive but there are still some just over $50. Tplink make quality stuff. If you are willing to only have 10/100 ports you can get a couple different routers new for about $30. If you want gigabit ports they have a couple closer to $50. Many other well known brands have routers in this price range.

Things like tenda or buffalo or other smaller brands likely will work also but their support is not as good if you have issues.
 

eyal__L

Honorable
Aug 17, 2016
9
0
10,510
0
Quick follow up question - Internet provider is trying to push their modem/router down my throat for about 200$ (spread around 2 years) but it seems pricey.
However, they say if I opt to get my own they will not be responsible for the internet not working - understandable though deplorable if you ask me.

Could you advice if this SuperVectoring is a thing I could easily recognize on a modem? As far as I can tell, that's their only requirement.
 
I have never heard that term so it must be something new or not used where I live. You are going to have to do research to see what that term really means and if there are other vendors that sell it in your country.

It is not all that uncommon for ISP to force their hardware on you. I know ATT does it for even when the technology can use standard DSL modems. Other ISP are a little more devious. Some have a equipment charge that also has a discount on a different fee. If you don't rent the equipment you have to pay the other fee. So you pretty much pay either a rental or the hidden fee. I guess the only good thing about them owning the equipment is if it get killed by lightning or just stops working it is their problem to fix. They also don't tend to blame the equipment as quickly because if they want you to replace it is them that wasted the money when it does not resolve the problem.

In general being forced to use the ISP router doesn't matter a lot. Almost all modern routers can pass 1gbit wan/lan so the router part itself will not slow the traffic down. The main difference tends to be the wifi but even that has gotten very good lately. ISP used to use cheaper radio chipset but the price has come down so much they now pretty much use the same ones as all the major companies. In your case you are already using AP to increase the coverage.

What is different is some of the software features on the router. I mean if you want something like NAS or VPN support you will have to place a second router in front. In this case you should be able to set their box to run as a modem only.....well most the time idiot att does not let you run in actual bridge mode. Still running 2 routers in the path really is only a problem for people hosting servers
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY